UC-NRLF V I *B ETE Qbb SOCIALISM INEVITABLE By GAYLORD WILSHIRE \2r 0> It WILSHIRE BOOK COMPANY 200 WILLIAM STREET NEW YORK GIFT OF Vtf*/, )rK j), Crj)S$ / . o Z^^^P^^* 9 ^^^ Socialism Inevitable (WlLSHIRE EDITORIALS) BY GAYLORD WlLSHIRE Editor Wilshire's Magazine THERE can be no Kope of progress or freedom for the people without the un- restricted and complete enjoyment of the right of free speech, free press and peaceful assembly. Gift of IRA B. CROSS WlLSHIRE BOOK COMPANY 200 William Street NEW YORK Copyright, 1907, by WILSHIRE BOOK CO. HlCtb CONTENTS Page. Preface to Wilshire's Editorials 7 Preface to Socialism Inevitable 10 Why a Workingman Should Be a Socialist 13 Salutory. (From The Challenge) 22 Old Lady's Ailment, The. (From The Challenge) 26 Capitalism Breeds no Horatius. (From The Challenge) 28 Psychological Problem, A 32 Columbia's Race for Liberty 37 Fallacy of Public Ownership, The 45 Trust Overshadows All Issues, The 53 Prophecy of 1891, A 62 True Joy of Life, The 67 Two World Conquerors 71 An International Office Seeker 78 Addams, Jane Artist 82 Why Save Men's Souls? 86 How High Can Wages Go? 89 American Ideal, The 93 Classes in America 97 Mysterious Mr. Hearst, The 100 Talk With Rockefeller, A 102 "Merger '" Decision, The 110 Hop Lee and the Pelican 112 Coffee, Currants and Oranges 116 Financial Cataclysm Inevitable, A 119 Undigested Securities 126 Sequel to a Modern Romance, The 130 3 454632 4 Contents Pag( White Collars and a Yellow Press 13 Sippers of Carlsbad, The 13 Monopoly a Necessity 14 Gompers and His Little Plan, Mr 14 America Suffocating With Wealth 15 Wall Street Journal Turns Moralist 15 Wallace's Great Book 15 Spencer, Herbert 16 "Right to Work," The 16 Wilshire's Exile to End 17 Bryan Will Discuss Socialism 17 How We Will Divide 17 Good Old Rockefeller 17 Bryan Explains Socialism 18 Strikers and the Meat Trust, The 18; Science Benefits the Rich 18< What Good is Government Ownership? 18! When Men Love Nature 191 How to be Happy 191 ^ Shaw's "Super-Man" 19! What Men Vote For 20: Class vs. Class: Resultant 20' World Trust, A 21< Death of the Democratic Party, The 21' Two Nations, The 22: Inexorable Trust, The 225 Rights of a Wheelbarrow, The 22! /- What is Religion? 23( We Feed Our Buffaloes, but Starve Ourselves 23! . Is Socialism Practicable? 23J Virchow's Cell Theory 23! Left at the Evening Post 231 Ten-Hour Decision, The 24] Contents 5 Page. Distribution the Problem 245 Mutation Theory Applied to Society, The 250 An Easy Way to Wealth, Wish For It 261 Municipal Ownership Its Meaning. 268 Money Under Socialism 279 New Shoes for Old Ballots 282 Wilshire's and the Crisis 284 Strike to Set Them Free 286 Roosevelt's Muck Rake 290 Effect of the Earthquake on Socialism 292 Feudalism Versus Capitalism in Russia 294 Socialism: A Religion 297 Boom of 1906, The 304 A Wilshire Prophecy of 1889 310 From Chance to Certainty 313 The Significance of the Trust 319 PREFACE TO WILSHIRE'S EDITORIALS THE contents of this volume consist almost exclusively of my editorials published within the past six years either in Wilshire's Magazine or in The Challenge, its predecessor. The burden of my song, as the reader will quickly gather, is that an industrial cataclysm, as the result of over- production, is about to appear in the United States. I predict this notwithstanding the fact that we are to-day in the fever of a greater industrial expansion than the coun- try has ever before experienced. It seems impossible to produce enough. Factories are over-burdened with orders. Our mines of copper, lead, zinc, silver and iron are being worked day and night under the stimulus of tremendously high prices, and yet are unable to supply demand. My endeavor, however, has been to show that all this activ- ity is ephemeral and temporary ; that the great demand arises rather from consumption by the capitalists of goods for new capital expenditure, than from any demand by the workers for the necessities of life. The increased demand, in short, is for pig-iron, not pig-meat. The essential difference between the two demands, speaking economically, is that one will cease as soon as the new machinery is built, and that the other, based on human hunger, can never cease. And I find in the Trust a sign that the industrial demand for new machinery is coming to a close; the Trust is manifestly a necessary device of the cap- italist to subdue the ill effects of over-production, in being, or in prospect. 8 Socialism Inevitable Our immensely increased capacity to produce, as the result of the use of better and still better machinery, has not been accompanied by any superior facilities for distribution and consumption, except to the extent that the capitalists have found an opportunity to expand their plants. The workers cannot, to any extent, increase their power of consumption, because that power is limited by their wage, and wages are forced by competition to remain at about the point of sub- sistence. Money wages, it is true, have increased somewhat in the last few years, but the rise in price of living has kept real wages down to about the same old level. The present period of great expansion is, to my mind, directly traceable to the stimulus given by the three great wars with which the world has lately been scourged. I refer to the Spanish- American war (1898), the Boer-British South African war (1899-1902), and, finally, to the Kusso- Japanese war (1904-1905). The effect of the Eusso- Japanese war, indeed, is seen in our present great industrial prosperity ; but I think that its influence cannot last much longer than a year from to-day. I believe, when the collapse of the present boom shall usher in a huge unemployed problem, that the workers of the United States, knowing they produce so much more than they can buy, will refuse to be placated by any reasoning of the capitalists to the effect that they must expect to go hungry. The time has passed when the people will be sat- isfied to starve because they produce too much food. The day, certainly, has gone forever when the people of a whole village will submit to death from typhoid fever because the doctors and preachers pronounce it a visitation of God as a punishment for their unrighteousness. They now know that typhoid comes with a polluted water supply, and will pro- ceed to purify that supply at once. And so it will be with us Americans in regard to death from starvation when the Preface To Wilshires Editorials 9 , capitalist, owing to over-production, can no longer employ us. Some years ago we would have quietly starved, thinking that panics and trade depressions were mysterious events visited upon man by a divine providence, into whose ways it was profane to explore. Now we know differently. We know that trade depression is caused by over-production, which, in turn, is due to the inability of the workers to buy with their low wages what they produce. And we know, furthermore, that low wages are caused by competition between workers by the competitive system. Hence we see that the basis of all the trouble is in the competitive system. My editorials are built upon this theory, and try to show how, by the substitution of the co-operative system Social- ism we can solve the industrial problem now threatening us. GAYLORD WILSHIRE. November 14th, 1906. PREFACE TO "SOCIALISM INEVITABLE" THE success of Wilshire Editorials has been so pro- nounced that I have carefully revised and rearranged its contents for future editions. Even the title has been changed, in keeping with the more permanent character of the work, though with no intention of hiding the fact that the matter possesses both the flavor and the faults of hasty journalistic utterances. There is, of course, much repe- tition as well; but since I know of no subject that can stand more repetition than the abuses of Capitalism, the advent of the Trust and the inevitability of Socialism, I have frequently refrained from using the blue pencil where, as the literary critic will probably inform me, it might have been most advantageously employed. The articles herein are now placed in the order in which they appeared in the magazine, and this, I hope, will give a certain insight into the evolution of our society and the progress of Socialism that the future historian and student may be glad to acquire. In any case the book appears at a moment when the very name of Socialism attracts widespread attention, and so can hardly fail to be of service to the move- ment, hence to the nation at large, and to all humanity. The preface to the first edition, written last November, wherein I predicted that "prosperity" would hardly last with us over a year longer, has been completely verified. The ter- rific slump in the stock market of last October, and the finan- cial and industrial collapse which has followed, presage a great unemployed problem. A war between Japan and Amer- 10 Preface To Socialism Inevitable 11 ica is to my mind the only possible event that offers tven a temporary solution to the problem. Of course I do not look for the capitalists deliberately to go about saving society by bringing on a war with Japan, because I neither credit them with the brains to see the profit in such a war, nor the heartlessness to seek profits at such a terrible cost. Nevertheless, I can foresee that events may easily shape themselves to bring on such a war. At the very first approach of an unemployed problem the animosity of our white laborers against the Japanese laborers in the Western States is sure to be displayed by outrages in far greater number and importance than those in San Fran- cisco, which have lately given rise to so much indignation. And right now Japanese are being introduced into the mines in our Western States, naturally much to the resentment of the whites who are displaced. When some twenty-five years ago there was an attempt made to introduce Chinese labor into the mines on the Pacific Coast it resulted in so much violence on the part of the whites that it had to be abandoned. But the Chinese then had no powerful government with the prestige of vic- torious arms to protest at their treatment, such as have the Japanese to-day, and even if they had I doubt if the result would have been different. The whites felt that they were fighting for their lives when they fought for their jobs, and they will feel the same when now they are brought into com- petition with the Japanese in this period of depression and unemployment. It will be a most fortunate thing for America if a labor conflict in British Columbia with the Japanese should force Great Britain to show us the best method to solve a very difficult problem. While all this is not absolutely pertinent to my theory of the near approach of a great industrial crisis, it cer- 12 Socialism Inevitable tainly must afford food for thought when it is understood that the Socialists declare that nothing but the waste of war keeps the present system of society going, and that the system, in turn, breeds conditions that make war between nations almost inevitable either through such accidental conditions as happen to exist through the presence of Japanese laborers competing with whites in America or through the animosi- ties engendered between nations in the scramble for inter- national trade. GAYLORD WILSHIRE. Dec. 14, 1907. WHY A WORKINGMAN SHOULD BE A SOCIALIST A SOCIALIST is one who desires that the wealth of the nation be owned collectively by all the people rather than individually by a small fraction of them, called capitalists. By "wealth of the nation" is meant the land, the railroads, the telegraphs, the flour mills, the oil refineries; in short, all those agencies by means of which food, clothing and other commodities are produced. By Socialism we mean the government ownership and man- agement of all wealth-producing industries. For instance, just as certain institutions, such as the common schools, the post office, etc., are now owned and managed by the people; under Socialism, not only these, but all our industries would be so owned and managed. In short, Socialists propose, in- stead of permitting Morgan and Eockefeller to own the United States and run it for their selfish interests, that we the people shall assume possession of it ourselves and run it for our own benefit. This is such a very simple proposition that anyone should be able to understand it; and that every patriotic American, and especially every workingman, is not in favor of Socialism can be explained only by his ignorance of what Socialism really is. It is surely a praiseworthy sentiment in a people to desire to own their native land, and quite as natural and praiseworthy as for a man to wish to own his home instead of renting it of a landlord. We say that every workingman who understood what So- cialism meant would certainly become a Socialist, for as- suredly his condition in life is not such that he should fear a change. You who read this, perhaps, are poor; you are dissatisfied, or at least you ought to be dissatisfied, with your lot in life; you have a sense of being unjustly dealt with by society. You know that your labor, alone, produces all the 13 14 Socialism Inevitable good things of life, and that some one else enjoys them; you know all this, and you know, or should know, that so simple a thing as casting your ballot intelligently can produce a change, so that you yourself will receive and enjoy all the fruits of your labor, with no necessity of giving the lion's share, or any share at all, to Rockefeller, Vanderbilt & Co. It is true that there is some excuse for your not realizing that the shackles which tie you to poverty are but figments of your imagination. You are befooled and humbugged at every source to which you might look for information. The newspapers, ostensibly devoted to the interests of the work- ingmen, in reality are but the tools of the capitalists their owners. Now reflect on your condition and consider that you are a citizen of the United States, a country possessing natural resources capable of easily supporting more than ten times its present population. You are informed by unchallenged and uncontrovertible statistics that, through the development of the steam engine and labor-saving machinery, the labor of one man can to-day produce commodities food, clothing, lodging, etc. sufficient to provide comfortably for twenty; and yet the fact stares you in the face that the return you get for your labor scarcely keeps you alive. Knowing these things, can you remain contented under a social system that gives you an existence more miserable than that of a slave? Do you never wonder to whom the surplus goes, and why? Let us put the matter clearly before you. The capitalist class owns the essentials of production that is, the railways, the flour mills, the oil and sugar refineries, etc., and the land. Now, to get clothing, food and lodging, both land and ma- chinery must be employed, and if one class owns these essen- tials of production, it is evident that it can demand of you, the class which does not own them, as much rent as it pleases for the use of them. And what does it choose to demand? Everything that you produce, except the very small part called "wages," or "salaries/ 5 which it allows you to keep to sustain your existence. You are in nearly the same position as a horse, in that you can never expect to get any more than just enough to keep you in working condition. The chief difference is that the employer of the horse feeds him even when he cannot for the time being use him, while your em- Why A Workingman Should Be A Socialist 15 ployer feeds you only when you are useful to him, and when you are not as in dull seasons he lets you out to starve, so far as he is concerned. He loses money if his horse dies, but he loses nothing if you die. You may ask, why don't capitalists pay higher wages? Why don't they pay wages sufficient to allow you properly to feed and clothe yourselves and your families? Furthermore, why don't workingmen successfully demand wages sufficient to enable them to educate their children in the public schools? What a mockery are free schools, when we must send our children to the mine and the factory to earn food for the family! The answer is short and simple. As long as there are mil- lions of unemployed men in the United States only too glad to get a chance to work for wages that will afford the bare necessities of life, wages will never rise. Consider a familiar every-day occurrence in business life. A and B each own a coal mine. Owing to competition each is forced to sell his coal at the lowest price possible. Now the cost of labor being the chief item in the expense of mining coal, if A pays his men less than B, it follows that he is in a position to under- sell B, and, unless B can manage to get his labor as cheap as A, he must retire from business, for he can sell no coal. The capitalists under our competitive system could not pay higher wages, even though they might wish to do so. Then, on the other hand, consider the laborer the miner. Suppose that he is getting two dollars a day and that some poor fellows out of employment come along immigrants, for instance, who, rather than starve, offer to work for one dollar a day. It is certain that, as the owners of the mines are forced to buy the cheapest labor offered, our two-dollar-a-day laborer must accept a reduction in his wages to one dollar or be replaced by the immigrant. Hence we can see how it is that the pressure of the unemployed upon the labor market always keeps the price of labor at the lowest notch. And the more labor-saving machinery that is introduced, the greater the number thrown out of employment, and the fiercer the struggle to get hired at any price. Now once recognizing this fact that low wages are due to our present competitive system, one can easily see how absurd it is for Democrats and Eepublicans to claim that either high 16 Socialism Inevitable or low tariff can ever make wages high. And workingmen are at last coming to recognize the fact that there is no re- liance to be placed on either of the old parties, and that they must organize a party of their own which will do away with the competitive wage system entirely, and substitute the co- operative system. Workingmen Americans! The issue is plain. Yours is the choice whether you will remain slaves in your own country, fettered by your own hands, to see your wives and your children live in poverty and squalor, aye, and often starve before your very eyes; or whether you will be free men, not in name only, but in reality whether you will own your own country and enjoy the full fruits of your honest labor. You may say: "Ah, well! Those are fine words; but it is impossible for anything to be done. Workingmen always have been poor and always will be. You Socialists merely make us feel our poverty more keenly make us discontented, without showing us any practicable plan to abolish the causes of our discontent. Of course we want to be in better circum- stances; of course we wish to provide better for our families. Certainly we would rather send our children to school than to the factory. We know that we are virtually slaves, and we should like nothing better than to end our slavery. What fool would not have his fellow men own their own country, rather than the capitalists? But even supposing the wealth of the nation were divided up, as we suppose you Socialists propose, it would simply be a question of time until Kocke- feller & Co. would have it all back again." Workingmen, you are mistaken: Socialists do propose a most practicable solution of the problem of how to abolish poverty permanently. If you will consider our plan you can- not help but agree that its accomplishment would prevent any fear of Kockefeller & Co. ever getting our country away from us after it is once restored. Socialism means anything but the division of wealth. It means the absolute concentra- tion of the ownership of the wealth of the country into the collective control and ownership of the people themselves, through the government. The only division that Socialists propose is the fair division of commodities produced, but they never propose the division of the ownership of the machinery that produces commodities. For instance, the people (the Why A Woekingman Should Be A Socialist 17 government) will collectively own both the land, the grain elevators and the flour mills, while you and I individually will own the product: the bread. ,- /'As to the practicability of the government ownership of '/the means of production, it is best answered by the considera- tion of the excellent management of such machinery as is now under the control of the government, such as the post office, the public schools, the Panama Kailway, etc. When, by the mismanagement of private owners, some railway is thrown into the bankruptcy court, and the government is forced to take control and conduct it through a receiver, it is a well-known fact that such government management has been uniformly successful. So, if the people can successfully operate bankrupt railroads, why should they not be able to ) operate solvent and successful railroads? Indeed the question is already answered, for government ownership of railways and telegraphs is the usual method in Europe and Australia. As a matter of fact there is really no serious attempt to v^deny the feasibility of government ownership, and what we will now demonstrate is, not its practicability, but its abso- lute necessity, as applied to all the means of production, if we wish to save ourselves from starvation. It seems para- doxical, but nevertheless it is true, that the greater the pro- ductiveness of machinery, the more difficult it is for the laborer to get the product. Let us consider the present state of industry in the United States. Within the last few years the owners of the various gTeat industries of this country, through the tremendous develop- ment of their plants, and the consequent fierce competition to sell goods, have been compelled to consolidate their inter- ests into Trusts to preserve themselves from bankruptcy, ow- ing to overproduction and the threat of resultant low prices. Considering the millions of poorly clothed and underfed men, women and children, it may seem to many that the excuse of "overproduction" advanced for the existence of the Trust is the boldest of lies. But it must be remembered that the owners of the sugar trust, the beef trust and other trusts are not in business from philanthropic motives, but to make money. Hence the mere fact of people starving for the want of what their machin- ery produces does not constitute any sound business reason 18 Socialism Inevitable for capitalists to feed them. Unless people have money they have no legal right to food. So we see that as far as the cap- italist is concerned there is "overproduction" when he finds no buyers, notwithstanding that there may be plenty who want but have no money to buy. In a country as productive as the United States and where wage-workers the great consuming class are paid such a small part of what is produced, there must always be danger of a great surplus remaining in the hands of the capitalists unless they avoid such a result either by increasing consump- tion or by restricting production; and restricting production means the shutting down of factories, turning out of employ- ment willing workers to starve in the midst of plenty. The critical period, viz., that of a great unemployed ques- tion, has so far been avoided only by reason of the constant progress of invention, which has given the capitalists an op- portunity to increase consumption and at the same time to make a good profit in employing workingmen both in the building of new machinery and in the reconstruction of old. For instance, within the last few years the street car lines have been transformed from the horse-power systems to elec- tric power, which has given employment to thousands of men. So as long as there is a demand for new machinery there is always life for the existing social system, since labor can be kept satisfied by being employed. ^___ - -" The appearance of the Trust, however, means that the making of more machinery is becoming unnecessary. The existing machines are not only sufficient for the demand, but as a matter of fact the capitalists say that there are already too many. And the Trust is a necessity, they say, not only to prevent production of unnecessary machinery, but to pre- vent the operation of the existing surplus machinery in pro- ducing surplus goods which can only be sold at a loss. Now Socialists are quite in accord with the capitalists in declaring that anti-trust laws are absurd, since Trusts are a necessary development of our competitive system, yet at the same time we realize that the Trusts are the forerunners of a huge unemployed problem. For while the Trust solves tem- porarily the problem of overproduction for the capitalist, it does so only by bringing up a future unemployed problem for the workingman. Why A Workingman Should Be A Socialist 19 Overproduction, as we have seen, is caused by the com- petitive system preventing the workingmen demanding enough wages to buy the goods that they themselves have produced. To prevent overproduction the competitive system must be abolished and a new system substituted which will allow the workers to consume what they produce. This new system is co-operation, the inauguration of which would mean that the workers would receive wealth according as they pro- duced it, instead of upon the present basis of allowing them the bare necessities of life. On the other hand, it is evident that if the workers take all they produce there will be nothing left for the capitalists. Hence there will be no incentive to own property privately, for there will be no profit, no rent, no interest. The aboli- tion of the profit system, in fact, means practically the end of the system of private ownership of capital, as it likewise means the inauguration of the system of public, or govern- ment, ownership of trusts and monopolies or, in short, of all capital. Socialism means the co-operative or government owner- ship and management of capital, and the co-operative distri- bution of the product to the workers, and by workers we in- clude the brain-worker as well as the hand-worker. Socialism means industrial democracy. We now live under an indus- trial autocracy, with King Eockefeller as our industrial ruler, just as before 1776 we lived under a political autocracy with King George of England as our political ruler. But the rea- sons which led America to achieve political democracy are not nearly as strong as those which are now about to force her to achieve industrial democracy. Public ownership of monopolies, or Socialism, is an inevit- ability because it affords the only possible solution for the distribution of commodities when the machinery of produc- tion finally develops beyond the control of the capitalists. This stage in the evolution of industry is now upon us. The Trust is the significant sign of the impending collapse of capitalism. ~ ; The Trust is not only a protection against competition, but is also a labor-saving machine, effecting tremendous econ- omies in production. Just as the manual laborers of fifty years ago tried to destroy the first machines which threatened 20 Socialism Inevitable to displace them, so we see a like ineffectual clamor voiced equally by both Mr. Bryan and Mr. Roosevelt, from the smaller capitalists of to-day against their inevitable displace- ment by the trust magnates. But monopoly is the future determining factor in production, and competition is forever dethroned. Already we see each of our great industries con- trolled by one corporation and headed by one man a "cap- tain of industry*' and this state of affairs is what more than anything else demonstrates the practicability of Socialism. Certainly if a Gould can successfully manage the telegraphs of the country, there can be no difficulty in the government doing the same thing. If Mr. Rockefeller, moreover, can manage the oil business, Mr. Vanderbilt the railways, Mr. Armour the beef business, Mr. Pillsbury the flour business, Mr. Carnegie the iron business, Mr. Havemeyer the sugar business, Mr. Frick the coal business, and Mr. Astor our land; we say, if individual capitalists can manage these proper- ties for their own selfish ends, that we, the people, can just as well manage them for our own use and benefit. Capitalism in its death throes tries every means to sustain prices at a profitable basis against the constantly growing menace of overproduction. To this end while it adopts the Trust at home, as a means of restricting domestic production, on the other hand, it institutes a policy of "Imperialism'' abroad as a means of increasing foreign consumption. Hence we see that both Trusts and "Imperialism'* work hand in glove, and are simply the results of a vain struggle to main- tain falling prices. All the foregoing is pretty plain talk, and should not be easily misunderstood. Some, however, while following the argument that (1) wages cannot, under the competitive wage system, rise above the subsistence point, no matter how pro- ductive labor may become; (2) that this curtailment of con- sumption must result in overproduction; (3) that next is the Trust, and (4) that the Trust must be followed by (5) the great unemployed problem; here they may stop without seeing the end of the whole matter in (6) the final, public ownership of the Trusts and other machinery of production Socialism. Of course, it must strike everyone as absurd that people cannot get enough to eat because they produce too much, and Why A Workingman Should Be A Socialist 21 yet everyone realizes that a laborer cannot eat if he doesn't earn any wages with which to buy food. It is also plain that a laborer cannot get a job of the baker to make bread, if the baker already has baked more bread than he can sell. It is likewise evident that if the laborer were his own baker he would not starve when it is his own oven that is full of bread. Now this is simply the Socialist argument. We say that this country of ours, America, is like a grand bake-oven filled with bread, and cake, too, for that matter; that the head baker of the national oven, Mr. Kockefeller, can't hire us to bake bread because he can't sell us the bread we have made, but that this is no reason why we should starve when all we have to do is to take over the bakery and feed ourselves with our own baking. And there really would be no opposition from Rockefeller to our taking the business off his hands so long as we took it for ourselves and let him have his share along with us. Rockefeller is not necessarily such a selfish fellow, but he naturally would object if he thought we were going to take the national bakery otherwise our own country away from him in order to give it to Carnegie or Vanderbilt, the very men from whom he has just wrested it. The opposition to Socialism, in fact, isn't from Rockefeller, but from the stu- pidity and apathy of the very people most to be benefited by it, from the workingmen themselves. All we have to do in order to own our own country is for a majority to vote for the Socialist Party, the only party that is pledged to carry out that idea. With the success of that party and the change that it would bring about, no one need work more than three hours a day, and everyone who wanted to work could find it, receiving in return the full fruits of his labor. Everyone would have leisure; children would be educated; all would be free, and happiness would reign supreme. Workingmen, you now know the road to freedom. When you pursue that path you will be free before that, never! 32 Socialism: Inevitable SALUTATORY (December, 1900.) TEE Challenge has been brought into life in order to voice for this community certain thoughts and ideas of a radical nature that are either altogether avoided in the daily press, or are published in so desultory a manner that those in sympathy with such thought are wholly unable to follow its development. The founder of this paper thinks that a crisis in the po- litical and industrial history of the United States is rapidly approaching, and that it is of the utmost importance for the people to be informed of this fact. Society is an organ- ism, and is governed by the same evolutionary laws that con- trol all other organisms. It will be the mission of The Chal- lenge to expound these laws. Certain people who regard themselves as scientific are ready enough to admit an inevitable evolution in the form of human society, but say that nature moves so slowly that it will take thousands of years before we can expect any ap- preciable change. The Challenge considers such views as essentially superficial. There is a critical point in all natural movements. Hydro- gen and oxygen, if mixed in exact proportions of two to one and brought into contact with an electric spark, will explode and form water. When water is heated to 212 degrees it boils and becomes steam. After the hen sits on her eggs three weeks they are hatched into chickens. Apparently in each of these cases there was no outward change until the critical point was reached, whereupon there was a sudden transforma- tion. We believe that society is approaching its critical point, and that a transformation must ensue. We can compare the present competitive system, embracing the private owner- ship of capital, to a shell which protects the formation of a new and better society within itself. When this new society is ready it will simply burst its shell and step forth, fully formed and complete. Salutoky 23 With such ideas it will necessarily be seen that The Chal- lenge can hardly be classed under the head of "reform" journals. A "reform" paper is one that hopes to improve our present society, and usually advocates putting honest men into office to secure this betterment. The Challenge has very little sympathy with such views. It is true that we want honest men in public life, but we also want them in private life, and are rather inclined to think that honesty in private life is to-day of more importance to society than in public life. We look upon the existing form of society as we would look at an old coat about to be discarded. It is hardly worth patching, and yet as the time for changing to a new coat is not absolutely determined, one feels that both decency and comfort demand that the old one be kept in as good order as possible until the other is actually ready. But it would be folly to spend all one's energies in the repairing process, and so delay the completion of a newer and infinitely better garment. We think that the Trust is the significant sign of the ap- proaching completion of this new social coat; and we have no fault to find with it for sending us this message. To attempt to destroy the Trust is as absurd as to batter up one's office telephone because it conveys unwelcome news. All innovations, no matter how good they may be, are usually rejected when first proposed, owing to the innate conserv- atism of mankind. The opposition which greeted the intro- duction of railways in England from the educated country gentlemen, the cream of the nation, was almost as great as that exhibited to-day by the Chinese Boxers against the in- troduction of railways in China. The Trust is unwelcome to many of us simply because we are of the conservative "Boxer" temperament, and dislike all innovations upon gen- eral principles. But trusts are the most remarkable labor- saving device ever perfected by the mind of man, and no doubt inspire jealousy, since they are so costly that very few can afford to own one. We can imagine a newspaper man opposing linotypes, not because they are bad in themselves, but because he is too poor to buy one, and so finds himself distanced by his competitors. He will say that there will no longer be a free press when 24 Socialism Inevitable it requires a man of money rather than of brains to establish a paper. The small business man has long been crying out against corporations on the same ground, viz., that plenty of capital is more of a requisite for success than brains. And the Trust not only accentuates this view, but has brought him to see that where it was formerly difficult for the man without money to establish himself, now it is absolutely impossible. Business to-day has assumed the monarchial form. Any native American may be the President of the United States, or at least, birth is not a barrier; but a man has no more chance of being the president of the Standard Oil Trust than he has of being called to the throne of England. And it is not so much that the chance of advancement ceases with the advent of the Trust. Not only does the Trust prevent ad- vancement, but it insists upon outsiders retiring altogether from the field. Now, if a man could hold his own he might consent to lose his ambition, but when he finds his very livelihood threatened, he is forced into active opposition. At present it is principally the small business men and jobbers who are opposed to the Trust. They wish it destroyed, and hope for a return to the old days of free competition. Being mostly men of commercial training, however, the simple business arguments in favor of the formation and perpetuation of the Trust have proved so convincing that they are ceasing to protest against the inevitable. Workingmen will be the next to feel the results of the economies effected by the Trust. At present, owing to the industrial boom in progress, the trusts are pushed to their utmost to fill orders; hence, notwithstanding the economies effected by concentration, there is no diminution in the de- mand for labor. The result has simply been a larger product with the same number of employees, a condition of affairs, however, that will last only as long as times are good. As soon as the boom is over the trusts will be compelled to discharge unnecessary workers, who will immediately join in the anti-Trust clamor. They will act the part of the dog biting a stone that hit him instead of going after the man who threw it. To-day, however, workingmen, as a class, are rather favorably disposed to the Trust. It has apparently given them more employment, and it certainly has given Salutory 25 them steadier employment. But let this condition once change, as change it must, and there will no longer be a McKinley carried triumphantly to the presidential chair. The Eepublicans played their trump card when they asked to be returned to power because they had made business good, and at the same time promised that they would continue such good times in the future. They have, in fact, frankly ac- cepted the onus of any bad times that the future may bring, and that bad times lie ahead is as sure as fate. Then will the Eepublicans be called to their accounting. Now, will the people be so foolish as to return the Demo- crats to power simply upon a program of negation? We think not. We believe that the political party of the future, if it is to be successful, must have an intelligent constructive program. 26 Socialism Inevitable THE OLD LADY'S AILMENT (April 17, 1 90 1.) THE United States, almost in the throes of giving birth to a new social system, is in a pitiful yet amusing plight. Indeed, we might be compared to an old woman who has all sorts of pains, and a number of quacks prescribing for her. She is a foolish old thing without sense enough to know the difference between a quack and a real physician, and so does not yet dare to make her choice. The quacks tell her she has a variety of diseases, and try to force all kinds of absurd remedies down her throat. She, herself, does not know exactly what ails her, but is beginning to see that the quacks are really no wiser, although she takes some of their medicine from time to time to get rid of them. She also hears, with wondering delight and surprise, the theory of the Socialist as to the cause of her ill-health; but she thinks he must be a base flatterer. How could a miser- able, selfish, ugly old thing, ever believe that she could be so delicately indisposed ? She admits that she rather likes the idea, but resolutely refuses belief. "The Trust, my dear madam," says the Socialist, whenever he gets a chance at her ear between so many consultants, "signifies that you are about to give birth to Socialism." "No, no," cries one of the quacks; "nothing of the sort: the Trust is a dangerous foreign growth, a tumor, that should be destroyed before it grows bigger and kills the patient." Then another quack steps up, elbowing the first one aside, and says, "Don't listen to him, madam; he would destroy your life. The Trust is now too large a body to be removed without causing your death. Let it alone and it will gradually pass away of itself. It will die a natural death." "But," says the patient, "that is just what you have been telling me for fifteen years, and I am growing worse and worse, and the Trust bigger every year. Why, it actually seems to be getting bigger than I am." "Ah, dear madam, that is all in the course of nature; and The Old Lady's Ailment 27 anyway it is rather an ornament, besides being extremely useful. Don't be alarmed; you would not know what to do without it. What would become of all your life's blood if it did not go to feed the tumor ? You would die of apoplexy. You would wear yourself out with natural exuberance if you should rid yourself of it. It gives steady employment to all your natural functions. Your heart, your lungs, even your brains, are all now well employed keeping this tumor in vigorous health. If you should lose it your heart would have only half-time work demanded of it, and it might stop beating altogether. I really think at times, madam, that this tumor, which you are pleased to call a 'foreign growth/ is quite as important as jour own life. You have burdened yourself so long with it that you are no longer beautiful and strong as you were when you were young and healthy, and I don't think your life worth so very much, anyway. In fact, the only reason I can see for your living at all is to keep the tumor alive." The old woman, of course, is rather shocked at such a frank statement from the doctor; but he is the old family physician, and she is so ill that she has lost the courage to discharge him. The Socialist doctor, however, is persistent in whispering to her the real meaning of her pains, and while she does not take his advice in discharging her quacks, she at any rate commences to do some thinking on her own ac- count. Meanwhile, every day makes her condition more and more critical, which, strange to say, seems to corroborate both the theory of the quack and that of the Socialist. The Trust tumor, in fact, seems now an inseparable part of the body; yet it makes a correspondingly heavy drain upon the resources of a physique less and less able to bear the strain. However, in such ambiguous cases a true diagnosis is but a question of time; and in this particular case the Socialist doctor knows that the time is rapidly approaching when the patient will determine for herself what ails her. Selah. 28 Socialism Inevitable CAPITALISM BREEDS NO HORATIUS (May 15, 1901.) MY experience with men has taught me that in regard to the fundamental realities of life they display little difference that is traceable to education or en- vironment. Given certain situations, men will act very much alike, no matter what their condition of life. If a vessel is stranded on a lone island in the Pacific ocean, and the sur- vivors have every reason to believe that their stay may be indefinitely prolonged, then all will set to work together to provide the necessities of life in very much the same way, and with little reference to their previous social or economic condition. The rich and the poor, men, women and children, all will do their share ; and if there are any shirks they are as likely to be among those who were formerly rich as among the poor. To-day if a poor man unexpectedly falls heir to a fortune, he likewise falls into the ways of the rich in living a life of idleness, notwithstanding the fact that before his windfall his life may have been one of most strenuous exertion. Men first do what they must; secondly, if it be possible, they do what they like. The poor man must do almost everything he does; the rich man has practically nothing he must do in life except perform certain natural functions. I say all this because some people seem to think that when a man is rich, he must necessarily be a very different sort of animal to the rest of us. Some people, moreover, who are poor, either in spirit, health or wealth, and for one or all of these reasons are unable to enjoy life after the manner of their more fortunate brothers, are often inclined to flatter themselves that this is an evidence of superior virtue on their part. They are like the wicked old lady who prided herself on forsaking vice, when in reality vice had forsaken her. When one is aboard ship and sea sick, it is very easy to be abstemious, and it is also very natural to look with great Capitalism Breeds No Horatius 29 disgust at the gross materialism of some old sea dog who prides himself on never missing a meal. There are any amount of men who don't drink whiskey simply because their livers won't allow them to, and such men are not unusually the ones who parade their enforced abstemiousness as a great virtue, and will sometimes join others to secure legislation preventing the consumption of whiskey. I am not intimtaing by this remark that the possession of a disordered liver is the necessary equipment of a thorough-going Prohibitionist, as I readily admit that most Prohibitionists have healthy livers; but I must say that most of the men I have known who like whiskey have certain fundamental differences in physique from those who do not, and that this difference is inherited and not acquired. All the foregoing is important as indicating how the rich are going to act when the time shall arrive for the transfer of their wealth to the nation. The only way for a poor man to determine how he will act is to put himself in the boots of a rich man, and imagine that the revolution is at hand. Most people who have never had money think that rich men enjoy one grand round of pleasure, whereas, as a matter of fact, most of them regard life as a decided bore. Particu- larly is this true of the rich American whose whole life is artificial. He has no friends, in the true sense of the word, and travel, which seems a wonderful and never-ending source of amusement to those who cannot afford it, soon loses its charm when long pursued. In short, he makes a business of pleasure, and loses the very end he aims at. The pursuit of art, of course, is too tedious, and involves too much hard work, to attract many of the rich ; and unless one gives it the labor it demands, its real charms are with- held. Indeed the rich man who gives his life to art is almost unknown. But domestic life is equally disappointing ; even his pleasure in his children being marred by the inevitable frivolity of the daughters, and the dissipation of the sons. A man's pride in life is to have a noble son. Tell me, however, the rich men of America who have sons that really gratify that pride. The rich read the same classical literature that is the common heritage of us all. "Horatius on the Bridge" 30 Socialism Inevitable is quite as popular with the Rockefellers and Vanderbilts as he is in any poor family. Regulus is not the private hero of a class. All the heroes of history, indeed, are just as much the heritage of the rich as of the poor, and the failure of an Astor or a Morgan to see any traits of the hero in his son makes him feel that he has lost just that much of the pos- sibilities of life. Now I don't think that Mr. Pierpont Morgan spends many days in regretting that conditions prevent young Ponty being a modern Horatius, but, nevertheless, the fact that young Ponty knows this, to that very extent weakens the idea that either old or young Pont will spend much time at any bridge holding back the great army of disinherited Americans when they come marching along to claim their own. In the first place, neither of the Ponts will think there is much worth fighting for, and besides, they will say, they'll be d d if they see any use in fighting for a lot of Rockefellers, Astors and Vanderbilts. When Horatius battled at the bridge, not only was he a hero, but he was of a race of heroes, and was fighting for heroes. There were plenty of his kind in those days : conditions bred them. The every-day life of the Roman was to exercise at arms and imagine himself a hero, and in just such a position as Horatius actually found himself. Now, old Ponty never thinks of such a life for himself or for young Pont. They fight battles at the Stock Exchange, it is true, but that's hardly the same thing as the Horatius kind of fighting. Men do not change, but conditions do. The Morgans and Vanderbilts, having nothing to fight for, lack both the desire to fight and any loyal friends to fight for them. Some of my enthusiastic comrades who look for rivers of blood when Uncle Sam and Uncle Ponty swap railroads and trusts, may exhibit courage by making up their minds for battle, but they are exercising their imaginations more than their reason. There is no man who will know quicker when to lay down than either J. Pierpont Morgan or John D. Rockefeller. They are unbeaten generals, because they have never under- estimated their antagonists. When Carnegie saw what he was up against he threw down his cards without a murmur. Rockefeller took the pot and gave Carnegie his I. 0. U. two Capitalism Breeds No Horatius 31 hundred million five per cent, bonds. And Uncle Sam will do the same thing to Rockefeller that he himself has done to Carnegie. 1 won't say what kind of an I. 0. U. Uncle Sam will issue to Ponty. Rocky & Co., but I will bet my hat when it comes to a show-down that there won't be any scrapping over the terms. 32 Socialism Inevitable A PSYCHOLOGICAL PROBLEM (March, 1902.) THE claim of the inevitability of Socialism places it upon a somewhat different plane than that of any other economic doctrine. No protectionist ever claims that "protection" is the result of industrial evolution, and that hence all the world must adopt it. No "single-tax" man thinks that his plan of taxation will come about as a natural process of human thought. This insistence of the inevitability of Socialism by Social- ists often gives rise to the query, which is seen in the follow- ing letter: Boston, Mass., Oct. 21, 1901. 22 Worcester Sq. Gaylord Wilshire, Esq. Dear Sir: I attended the lecture given by you last evening (Oct. 20), in Paine Memorial, by invitation of a friend of mine. I have belonged to the Democratic party, but am now very much interested in Socialism. There was a statement, if I remember, made by you, in the course of your lecture, that Socialism was inevitable something which the laws of nature would force to come to pass. Now, if you really think so, "why not let things take their course? The ultimate result will be the same?" By way of explanation I will say that I don't ask you this ques- tion for the purpose of "sticking" you, as the small boy says, but as a matter of information for myself and others who are interested in the movement. Hoping you will oblige by answer- ing this question, I am, Yours sincerely, Thos- J. Smith- This is at base a problem in psychology. If you wish a man to perform a task, is he more likely to do it if you tell him beforehand that it will be very easy, or if you tell him it will be extremely difficult, perhaps impossible? Of course, there can be but one answer. The easier a de- A Psychological Problem 33 sirable thing is to acquire, the more likely is the man to attempt it. The baby wants the moon and reaches for it until he grows old enough to learn he cannot get it. Then he tries for the earth, and finds that Morgan has been there first. It is, of course, true that if I think my breakfast is going to fall down from heaven whenever I wish it, and exactly in the form, place and time that I wish it, then it might appear that I will not be likely to work for it. However, we do know that as a matter of fact the rich man will spend long hours of the most arduous labor stalking deer, or killing salmon, when no motive of the knowledge that he will go hungry unless he does such work, can be alleged. He simply obeys a natural and irresistible instinct to work for his living, not- withstanding that he is under no necessity of doing so. Man's pleasure in life is the exercise of his activities, and inasmuch as the problem of getting food has for so many thousands of years been his greatest stimulus to activity he cannot resist continuing in that mode of action, even when the immediate stimulus is withdrawn. He acts simply from the momentum gained through his forefathers. The very phrase, "pleasures of the chase" shows the imperative nature of this call to the rich. Now, it is evident that there would be no fun hunting deer if you knew positively that there were no deer in the forest. So with Socialism. The reason we want it is not only be- cause we think that it will benefit humanity, but also because we think we can get it. Take either one of these factors away and we would never struggle for it. The nearer at hand it is the more we will struggle for it. It is notorious that those men who have the clearest conception of the economic inevitability of Socialism are always the most persistent workers for it. For instance, there has never been a man in England that has devoted so much of his life to Socialism as Hyndman, yet he himself always declares that it is his knowledge of the inevitability of the advent of Socialism in a comparatively short period of time that keeps him active in the movement. I myself have probably always been, and am yet, the most optimistic man in the whole Socialist movement. Since the time I became a Socialist I have never placed the social rev- 34 Socialism Inevitable olution away over five years, and the mere fact that it has never come off according to my predictions has never daunted me. I am still a "five year man, with a possibility of three," and I will never be anything else. If I had to be in "the hun- dred year, one-step-at-a-time, take-what-you-can-get" class, you would find me automobiling my life away down at New- port with Eeggie Vanderbilt instead of editing this maga- zine. There is nothing of the Salvation Army stuff about me preaching to save a man's life after he is dead. Nor is there anything of the Seth Low- Jerome business either grubbing away trying to reform the Crokers, Platts and Dev- erys. That sort of thing may amuse Jacob A. Riis, and Carl Schurz, and President Eoosevelt, but it has no attractions for me. As said, I would rather chase down the pike on my Red Dragon at 'steen hundred miles an hour, terrifying the farmers, than go in for any "reform game." Socialism is the only game that amuses me, and humanity the only stake worth my while wasting my time playing for. Let the Schwabs go in for Monte Carlo if they will. They are fools to be ignorant of what America can furnish in the way of sport with its Maddens and Roosevelts. I will take my chances on a man working for Socialism if I can shove the economics into him far enough, while I won't give a cent for a man who will only get along far enough to admit that it is a "good thing." He must not only see that it is "good," but that it is "coming." Show me a man who is a Marxian in economics, and who knows the extent of our industrial evolution who understands the significance of the trust, and I will show you a good Socialist. I am not afraid that such a man will not work for the cause simply because he thinks it will come anyway. Socialism will not come without our working for it any more than the egg would be hatched unless the chick worked itself out of its shell. However, the chick, we know, will work itself out at the proper time, because we know it must obey an irresistible instinct. The same with humanity, when it is ready to be hatched from the shell of capitalism into the new life of Socialism it will instinctively work its own salvation. Humanity will struggle to free itself from the shell, simply because it can- not help obeying the irresistible instinct of self-preservation, A Psychological Problem 35 which is just as strong a social instinct as it is an individual instinct. It is quite true that the particular class o~humanity which will bear the brunt of the struggle will be the working-class, and it is to that class we must look for .the great organiza- tion whicn is to forrn~frbrn the result of the industrial evolu- tion. Again referring back to the chick. breaking out of its shell, we may think the bill or the legs have more to do with the breaking out than the feathers or the lungs, but we know that back of all the struggle is the nervous organization, the brain, which must first be formed before any concerted action can take place. So it is with the working class. They must first become conscious of their class. They must become "class-conscious" before we can expect intelligent action from them. The chick will have motion withlhTIEe shell long days before its brain is formed the brain comes last in de- velopment in all life but this motion will not be intelligently directed to break the shell until the brain is sufficiently de- veloped to give it this conscious direction. It is the same way with the labor movement of to-day. It staggers blindly. When the labor giant is hurt it strikes out blindly, like a man half paralyzed, as liable to hurt itself as its enemy. Labor's brain is as yet undeveloped. It has now reached the "trade- union" stage of development, which is as far from maturity as is the brain of a week-old infant. However, "trade-union- ism" is a necessary stage in the progress of the labor brain, and it is as foolish to think that this step could be skipped as it is to think that while labor has this kind of a brain that it can think out clearly the Socialist program. A smart child will learn to read without a teacher, but he will learn more rapidly if he has one. Socialists are the in- structors of ignorant and immature humanity. Columbia's Eacb For Liberty 37 COLUMBIA'S RACE FOR LIBERTY (April, 1902.) TO many Americans the phrase "Sweet Land of Liberty" sounds like the baldest irony, although there was a time when it was taken in all seriousness. One of the most significant features of the times is the attitude that "Life/' a humorous weekly having its circulation almost exclusively among the "400," is taking toward our modern plutocracy. One would think that it would be the last paper to publish such a cartoon as that seen on the opposite page. Just now, no doubt, poor, foolish Columbia is valuing the miserable apples of Greed and Avarice that her competitor, the Trust, casts in her path more than she does the winning of the race for liberty. But the race is not by any means so nearly finished as the plutocrats in the royal box would seem to imagine. The Trust has one more apple to throw, Fraud, and will needs throw it soon, and then his last card will have been played. Columbia can win as easily as could the goddess of old, and certainly will win notwithstanding the tricks of her competitor. The marvel, however, is that she allows herself to be tricked even for a moment. Why is it that a people, as intelligent as we Americans are, allow ourselves to be kept out of our inheritance by such self-evident trickery as the Trust is now imposing upon us? Here we have a country abundantly able to support all of us in affluence. The Trust, by the great economies it has been able to effect in production, has confessedly made the task of producing the things we want infinitely easier than ever before, yet on the other hand, is denying men employment, alleging that they are no longer needed owing to these self- same economies. This lack of employment, of course, means the impossibility of men procuring the food they need, and all because food has become so much easier to produce. Is it not absolutely incomprehensible to think that we Americans can accept such a condition of affairs and not 38 Socialism Inevitable see the utter absurdity of it all? Here we are in a land flowing with milk and honey, which by the aid of the Trusts, we have arranged to procure at the least possible expense and exertion. Further to lessen the task, moreover, we have labored for years and years inventing and constructing ma- chinery: indeed so busy have we been that we have almost forgotten our original purpose and have begun to think that the making of the machines was an end in itself instead of being the means to an end. Hence, when the Trusts came along and told us that more machines are now built than there is any need for, and that consequently our labor will be no longer needed, instead of throwing up our caps with a "Huzza Boys! the work of man is done; now let us use these machines over the making of which we have spent so many weary years of toil!" I say, instead of making any such an outcry of joy at the completion of the task, we are terrified to death for fear that unless we can continue the making of machines, there will be no way of disposing of our labor to get a living. We laugh at the Chinaman who thought the only way to roast a pig was to burn down his hut, yet we fail to see the striking analogy to our own case. When we were building the machinery we simply made a trade of our labor. Part of us worked in the fields growing the wheat, and part in the machine shops making mowing machines. Then we exchanged our machines for the wheat, and fed ourselves. The end, of course, was to feed ourselves, and we thought to attain that end more easily by building mowing machines. We fed ourselves all right before we ever had any mowing machines, but we were not satisfied to leave well enough alone. We felt that we had to do better, and we certainly succeeded, for one man with modern ma- chinery in the wheat field can do the work of one hundred ordinary laborers ; but now when we have quite finished build- ing all the machines we need, we find that instead of getting one hundred times as much wheat as formerly, we actually are told by some of our statesmen that we may not even get as much as we did before we had any machines at all. The only hope for us, according to some people, is that we develop our foreign trade, so that when we make more mowing machines than can be used in this country, the foreigner will take pity on us and use them in his country. Columbia's Race For Liberty 39 This is called by the Koosevelt-Hanna combination, "sal- vation by reciprocity." It means that the mere finishing up of sufficient mowing machines to cut all our American wheat must now be followed up by the building of mowing machines for all the rest of the earth. When we finally finish this mighty task we are not to expect that hundred for one return that we have been awaiting for, lo, now, these fifty years. Not at all: we are informed that after we have built machines for all the world, we will then have indeed finished our task and must prepare to move off the earth. In short, just the time when we think we are getting in shape to rest and enjoy life, we are told it is time to die! We are not going to move off the earth, however, and neither do we propose to shuffle off this mortal coil. We are going to awaken to the fact that we have been fools long enough, and will hereafter let the machines do our work; eating our bread without any pangs of conscience that it is produced by the harnessing of Niagara rather than by the sweat of our noble brows. If anybody wishes to sweat, let him take a vapor bath; but as for us we see no terrors in a dry-browed future. At any rate we are going to have one try at it, even if we lose. This must not be taken to mean that labor, like virtue, is not its own reward ; but simply as a protest against getting too much of a good thing. We are, indeed, too apt at times to look upon the product as the only possible reward for work, whereas, as a matter of fact, there is an equal reward in the very work that led to the product, although our modern methods of employment quite obscure it. For a healthy man there is joy in the digging of post-holes, provided there are not too many to be dug in a day, and certainly more satis- faction than there can be in the mere possession of the holes after they are dug. What painter ever enjoyed the possession of his picture as much as he did the painting of it? I am sure if Pierpont Morgan were to analyze his feelings, he would admit that his pleasure in forming the United States Steel Company was far greater than any he may now have in possessing the cash and bonds he received for doing the work. Even the mere reminiscence of achievement is a greater pleasure than the possession of a material reward. This reward, intrinsic to actual work, runs through all 40 Socialism Inevitable nature. We see it in the intense delight of children to do something of use for their elders. What little girl in fortu- nate circumstances does not like to make an effort at cooking or sewing for her mother? But when we see a little girl sewing her soul into her work in a sweater's den we can hardly realize that under different conditions that same work which now wears the child's life away might be a joy to her. It is not work, but over-work, that is painful. The exact determination of the boundary between work and over-work is, of course, impossible. A man will perform prodigies of labor during a hunting trip that will but add to his health, whereas the same amount of work done digging post-holes would be heart-breaking drudgery. Similarly Ed- ison, working night and day to perfect an invention, can do the most strenuous work with no ill results to his health, whereas if he were without the stimulus of pleasure he would break down at it. It is often said that when a successful business man does far more work than his meanest employee which is frequently the case his material reward should be reckoned accordingly. This reasoning, however, entirely overlooks the reward that exists in the work itself. That there is more joy in giving than receiving is a truism, but that the joy of giving consists in the doing of the work which produces the gift is often overlooked. Nevertheless, if we analyze some of our social customs we will find that this idea that there is pleasure in making a gift of the products of our labor, when that labor is confessedly from its nature of a pleasurable kind, is tacitly admitted; for such a gift is conventionally possible among equals and friends, where any other would be impossible. For instance, if I go shooting and send a brace of wild ducks to my friend, he will gladly accept them, even if he has a suspicion that I bought them in the market; for there is a chance that I really have shot them myself, and anyway I have had the fun of the trying. Hence he feels that in accepting them he is under no obligation. If, on the other hand, I should send him a pair of tame ducks with no in- timation that I had acquired them in any other way than by purchase, the present would be regarded in the light of an insult. I can only give him tame ducks if it is known that I am playing the gentleman farmer and am raising ducks Columbia's Hace For Libert* 41 purely for amusement. These customs, I repeat, have at base a clear recognition of the delights of labor when performed under proper conditions. The statement seems absurd to many that labor, in the future, under Socialism, will give quite as much pleasure, if indeed not more pleasure, in the doing of it than in par- ticipation in its results. Where does the pleasure come in to-day when we go off to the woods for a week's picnic? It is certainly not in the eating of the fish or game that may be killed. In fact people often go out camping and take all their provisions with them. Of course the change from con- ventional city life is a relief, but I venture to say that a great amount of the pleasure consists in doing the necessary camp work. I think it will be admitted by those who have tried both ways, that when servants are taken along to do the work, half the pleasure of a camping trip is lost. It is quite true that all high civilizations in the past have been based upon the servitude of man to man. A select few have been permitted to live a higher life perched on the backs of the many. And far be it from me to say that there is not a strong argument in favor of having a small class enjoy the delights of culture rather than have the whole mass brutalized. Man must have servants to take the labor of getting a living off his shoulders sufficiently to develop his intellect, but there is no reason why the servant should not be a machine rather than a fellow man. It is not the nature of the servant that gives the necessary leisure; it is the nature of the service. I must have food and clothing, but the slave that provides them can be operated by muscle or by steam. Even on the camping trip it must be remembered that, although we may take no servants with us, we take congealed labor along in our flour and bacon, our blankets, our guns, and, in fact, the whole of our camp accoutrements. And the goods we take with us represent just so much less labor for us to perform while on the trip. I am dwelling upon this idea of the pleasure of work be- cause I feel that many of those who have wealth to-day look with unnecessary horror upon a change of society which will necessitate conditions in which all must work. They not unnaturally think that by "work" is meant the kind of drudgery performed by the laborers, clerks and servants about 42 Socialism Inevitable them, and I certainly do not blame a man raised in the lap of luxury for looking with consternation upon such a life. It is but natural that he should make up his mind to fight to. the death to resist any such change. I know that in the days before I was a Socialist and had simply a vague idea that Socialism meant drudgery for everyone, and that it was to come, if ever it did come, through the deliberate organizing of the working class to take possession of the wealth of the rich ; I say that when I thought this, I, too, made up my mind to fight to the last ditch rather than let it occur. I felt that I might as well be dead as live the life of the poor around w-^ine, and that I could risk nothing by fighting, and might gain. In those days I had not heard of social evolution as something that was of present-day importance. It had never been suggested to me that Socialism was coming like the winter's snow, and that I might as well try to fight off the snow with Krupp guns as to resist it. That Socialism was inevitable, and that it meant not drudgery but universal joy, suddenly broke upon me one day like a flood of light. It was no supernatural light either, that led to my conversion, but simply deductions obtained from a study of the Trust, and my . knowledge of the business conditions that led to its appear- ance. I made a flop in one night, about fifteen years ago, and from being the most extreme follower of the laissez faire school of economists became the most extreme of the col- lectivist school. There was no step-by-step process in my evolution, and I have never budged an inch in my economics since my change of belief. Immediately upon my conversion, moreover, I became a propagandist and thought, in the inno- cence of my heart, that every man I talked to would see things as I did, and follow suit". """"" The economic necessity of Socialism seemed so easily proved that I was really green enough to think that Mr. Rockefeller himself would see the point when it was shown to him, and might even join in the movement to introduce Socialism. Upon this theory I actually wrote him a very polite letter, showing how he had a chance to go down in history as the apostle of Socialism if he would but turn his vast wealth to that end. I am still waiting hopefully for his reply. It will soon be fifteen years, but still my patience is not ex- Columbia's Race For Liberty 43 hausted. In the meantime, however, Mr. Pierpont Morgan has appeared on the financial horizon, so that there is a double string to my bow. It may appear to some that it is the height of absurdity for me to suggest in any way, except as a joke, that Rockefeller or Morgan would ever accept the Socialist theory, and actually assist in its consummation. I admit that my experience in gaining converts from the rich does not justify me in my hopes, yet we must remember that hope is notable for its triumphs over experience. To prove that Socialism is inevitable is as simple a prob- lem to me as to demonstrate that two and two are four. If this demonstration were one that I would rather not have heard, and this is sometimes the case, I certainly would not so stultify myself as to refuse to admit that two and two continue to make four. Now there is nothing particularly different in the make-up of Mr. Rockefeller and myself, and whatever difference there is should make him still more likely to come to my view of the case. He is much better at figures than I can ever hope to be, and should therefore arrive at my conclusion upon mathematical grounds much sooner than I did, once his attention is called to the problem. Upon ethical grounds, moreover, he certainly has far more reason to come to my convictions than ever I had. I never 6et myself up as a man to lead the prayer meetings, and have never been an elder in the church. In short, I never made the least claim to any altruism in my make-up : I simply made a study 1 of how to amuse number one. Nor have I professed anything ' different since I became a Socialist. Hence it seems to me that Mr. Rockefeller, as well as Mr. Morgan, who are both good at figures besides being devoutly religious, are theoretically bound to come sooner or later into the collectivist school of economics, and become contributors to this magazine. They both pray every day to the Lord that His "will be done on earth as it is in heaven." I would ask any good Christian who is not a Socialist, if such there be, what is his idea of God's will on earth? Wherein does his idea of the kinerdom of God on earth differ from the idea that the Socialists have of the earth under Socialism? Of course. I can understand how Mr. Rockefeller would disagree with the Democrat or the Populist who wishes to destroy the trusts, but I do not see wherein he and the Socialist would 44 Socialism Inevitable have any room for discussion. Even upon the point of private ownership versus public ownership of the Standard Oil Trust Mr. Rockefeller would be in agreement, for we both say that the change cannot be made before the people wish it, and that after the people do so declare that such is their wish, there will be no resisting them. Probably Mr. Rockefeller would not yet be in favor of the nationalization of the trusts; but he could easily excuse himself by saying that he is simply averse to doing anything that the people do not wish done, and he would be fully justified in his contention that the people have done little to indicate that they wish any such step taken. Young Mr. Rockefeller declared the other day that the de- velopment of the Trust was like unto the development of an American Beauty rose. That to have a fine rose many buds must be pinched off and their sap turned to the remaining one; and he paralleled it in saying that to have one great business many smaller ones must be exterminated. This again is in line with the Socialist's idea. The Standard Oil Trust is itself but a large bud, and it, too, must be pinched off in order that its sap may flow to the American nation as a whole, for the Nation is the American Beauty rose that we are all interested in developing to its highest possibilities. Pinch, brothers, pinch, pinch with care, ly Pinch every trust that absorbs our air. The Fallacy Of Pcblio Ownership 45 THE FALLACY OF PUBLIC OWNERSHIP (May, 1902.) AS an interested spectator I attended a convention last month at Louisville, Ky., called for the purpose of effecting a union of all reform parties with the Popu- list Party. Only the so-called Public Ownership Party, how- ever, apart from the Populists themselves, were officially represented, though seventy-five delegates, in all, attended. The allied People's Party was the name chosen for the new organization with a platform which had little in it beyond a demand for Public Ownership of Public Utilities and for the Initiative and Eeferendum. The convention adjourned on April 5th, and that night an open meeting was held in the convention hall at which I had the honor of being the principal speaker. I was very glad of the opportunity afforded me to explain to the Populist delegates the difference between their theory of politics and that of the Socialists, and I am confident that my remarks will bear considerable fruition. ^^-^^ The Populists to-day are ripe for Socialism, and, indeed, seem rather hurt if you question their sympathy with the movement. As a matter of fact, however, I think very few of them have any political ideal other than the present com- petitive system, tempered with Public Ownership and con- trolled by the Initiative and Eeferendum. Now, let me say at once that I, too, am in favor of the Initiative and Eeferendum and of Public Ownership, and advocated these important measures, both on the stump and in the press, five years before the Populist Party was born. I would furthermore be the first to agree that of all reform measures to-day, these are probably the most important. In- deed I might say that if I thought either of them could be gained at once by dropping the Socialist program and con- centrating upon it, I would feel justified in joining such a policy. Hence, it is not that I am impatient for the whole 46 Socialism Inevitable program, or that I decry the importance of these measures, that I refuse to bother with them, but simply because I think the best way to get the part is to demand the whole, if it be not actually easier to get the whole than any of its parts. In the first place, in order to get the people to move you must give them a reason for moving. The mere fact that a man has arms is no assurance that he will work unless he finds some reason for doing so. I use my arms to get my dinner, but if there is no dinner in prospect my arms will not be used. And so it is with the Initiative and Keferendum : I must first know of something to be gained by political power before I will want that power. Then if I find that the present representative system does not aid me in getting what I want, and think that Direct Legislation will, I will work for the Initiative and Keferendum. But in order to get me to work for it you must first show me what I am to gain by such a political reform. Every Socialist sees a great ideal in Socialism, and there- fore takes an interest in any political measure that promises the realization of that ideal. Hence we see in certain Euro- pean countries, notably Belgium at present, that the Social- ists are at the forefront in demanding universal suffrage. In our country, of course, we have universal suffrage, but as the people are such fools that they do not know how to use this complicated weapon, Socialists favor giving them a more simple way of expressing their views at the polls ; and there- fore are in full sympathy with the demand for Direct Legisla- tion. Indeed it has been a cardinal plank in their political platforms for twenty years or more. Now the ideal that the Populists are holding up to the people to be gained by Direct Legislation is that of Public Ownership of Monopolies, and the question to be decided is whether such an ideal can in any way be regarded as a better vote-getter than that of Socialism. Granting that both Public Ownership and Socialism are equal in their practicability, and that one could be put in operation, if the people willed it, as soon as the other, there is absolutely no comparison between the two programs simply as ideals. Socialism is heaven: Public Ownership, at best, is a third-rate boarding house. Of course the Populist will reply that Public Ownership has the advantage of being more The Fallacy Of Public Ownership 47 easily understood, and that it is something the people are ready to adopt right now, whereas Socialism is looked upon as a beautiful dream, and quite outside the realm of prac- tical politics. Furthermore they claim that the tremendous majorities given last month in Chicago for Public Ownership is conclusive evidence that the people are ready right now for such a program. Facts, certainly, are stubborn things, and if the vote ex- pressed by the ^Referendum in Chicago is indicative of the sentiment throughout the United States, and I admit it is to a certain extent, andnf^t" political party can be built upon such a sentiment, then certainly the Public Ownership policy is a good political policy for the new Allied People's Party to adopt. But I doubt if any political party can be built upon a policy of Public Ownership, although both Democrats and Eepublicans will adopt such a program in its entirety if they see that they must do so in order to win. The vote in Chicago, it is to be remembered, was not a party vote, and I do not think there has ever developed a division between the old parties on the question of Public Ownership. No sooner will the sentiment become powerful enough than every candidate of every party will declare in its favor. They will do this to insure their election, and even though they may not intend at the time of their declaration to carry out their pledges, yet with the growth of sentiment upon the subject there can be no doubt of the people's will ultimately being obeyed. In short, the movement toward Public Owner- ship coincides with the interests of such a large proportion of the population and runs counter to so few that I cannot see the possibility of any party being formed to oppose it. Nor would it seem necessary to form a party to carry it into effect, since the established parties will carry it forward to preserve their very existence. This sentiment for Public Ownership, moreover, except so far as it relates to railroads and telegraphs, is very likely to be of local nature. Chicago demands Public Ownership, not so much because she has any clear idea of its benefits, but because she has so fully experienced the iniquity of private ownership. But many cities have not had the advantage of such able and courageous instructors in economics as has Chicago with her boodle aldermen, and even where con- 48 Socialism Inevitable siderable effort has been made to educate the people in this regard, as in my native city of Cincinnati for instance, it does not seem to follow that any great benefit will result. I was in Cincinnati last month at the time the election returns from Chicago came in, and was informed by citizens, who seemed competent to judge, that there was no such senti- ment in their city as in Chicago. Now Cincinnati has been for years notoriously under the domination of the Gas, the Street Bailway and the Telephone Companies, who have a beautiful combination to rob her of all she may possess; yet she has not even made up her mind to have a change. Then there are many cities that receive much better service from their private corporations, and so take little direct in- terest in what concerns their sister cities so vitally. Or again, Chicago might be successful in her demand for the municipal ownership of her public utilities, and the moment this occurred would fall out of the fighting line, having gained her own ends. No matter how much she might be interested, from the altruistic standpoint, in, say, Cincinnati, since she could not vote in the Cincinnati elections, such a sentiment would not carry much political weight. It also must be remembered that more than half the population of the country live on farms and in small villages, where there are not now, nor ever can be, any purely municipal problems to be solved. Hence as the Populist party is born of the farmers, it cannot look for the farmers' support upon a Municipal Public Own- ership platform. There remains, then, the consideration of the platform being successful with those who demand the public ownership of railways, telegraphs and natural monopolies. That the sentiment in this direction is growing very fast cannot be denied, but that it will crystallize into a party platform and be opposed by other party platforms I very much doubt. There are vast numbers of people who are so indirectly af- fected by the railway tariffs that it will probably be very hard to arouse their support. For instance, it would be extremely difficult to convince a city laborer that the government owner- ship of railways would help him as much as a ton of coal in the cellar sent around by "Bath-House Tim," the president of Tammany Club No. 6. What the laborer is interested in is, not the farmer nor the merchant, but himself. He wants, The Fallacy Of Public Ownership 49 first and foremost, a job, and after he has a reasonable assurance of that, he begins to think of better wages. Beyond this idea the average laborer seldom rises, and nobody can blame him who remembers that self-preservation is the first law of nature. Now, let us for a moment consider the ideal presented by a complete system of Public Ownership of "Monopolies," both municipal and national. And by "Monopolies" I mean not all the means of production and distribution, but a selected few, such as the gas and water supplies, etc., of cities, the rail- roads of the country, and possibly a few of the trusts. We already know from the experience of other cities and countries that Public Ownership, while having many advantages over private ownership, is no solution of the labor problem. I remember well that the one sight that impressed itself upon me in Glasgow was the number of miserable women seen in the wet streets puddling about with bare feet, and usually with bare heads. This is something I have never seen in Paris or London or New York, and is not a reassuring picture of the benefit to labor flowing from Municipal Ownership, for it must be remembered that Glasgow owns all her public utilities, including the street-car lines. Moreover, we are to-day hearing of a threatened social revolution in Belgium, although Belgium is par excellence the country of Public Ownership. Not only are the municipal utilities owned by the cities, but the State owns the railways and telegraphs, and yet Belgium is no Utopia. Public Ownership upon the lines laid down as above, sim- ply means a certain probable benefit to those workmen who happen to be employed in the utilities taken over by the pub- lic, and further benefit to the public that is served by the said utilities. This last benefit, however, may be of but very tem- porary duration, so far as the economy of the service is con- cerned, for in the first place, it is not at all certain that much economy can be effected if the wages of employees are raised and the hours shortened, and even if there were a marked economy, it is almost a certainty that the price received by the manufacturers and shippers would in most cases recede by competition to a point where all that was gained by a lowering of freight rates would be lost. As far as the trusts go they now charge for their goods 50 Socialism Inevitable all that the traffic will bear; and those that are not national- ized would naturally gain for themselves any advantage in the lowering of freight rates; but I do not see where either their employees or the consumer would come in. The farmer shipping wheat would, of course, gain by a lowered freight rate, as the price of wheat is not fixed by competition limited to this country, but in the world market. But the wheat farmer is not the typical farmer. If he were, then certainly the farmers would be fools not to favor nationalizing railways. If the Public Ownership policy were carried into effect it would simply mean that the holders of the wealth not nationalized would get all the profits. That is, if the Vanderbilt railways were nationalized, then Van- derbilt would buy up the flour mills and get his profits out of them instead of out of the railways. It must always be remembered that under the competitive wage system the whole of the product, above and beyond what must be given as wages to the laborers in order that they can buy enough to keep themselves alive, falls to the capitalist class, under the various names of rent, interest and profits; so that Public Ownership can do nothing but effect a different method of division among the capitalists. This means that the laborers must remain where they are as long as the competitive wage system prevails. To-day we see the Beef Trust raising its prices to unheard- of rates. Does this mean that the workman will eat less meat? Not necessarily; he may think that he must have what he has been accustomed to, and that if he must pay more, then he will either strike for higher wages to allow a continuance of his usual rations of beef, or he will cut off on some other portion of his expenditure, say his sugar or his coal oil. But whatever he does, it means that until some other trust puts up its price, the Beef Trust will be just so much ahead. Then suppose the Sugar Trust follows suit. Again the workman may either strike for more wages or he may eat less sugar, or he may eat the same amount and cut down his bread allowance. If he eats the same amount, the Sugar Trust just gains so much at the expense of some other trust. It's a very pretty game this, now being played by the trusts, each seeing how high it can put prices, and The Fallacy Of Public Ownership 51 knowing that the higher the price to the workman, the less there is for the other fellows. Now, if we had the municipal ownership of street cars, and Tom Johnson's three-cent fare program, it would simply mean that there would be a swoop of the capitalists for that two cents the workingman has saved, each trying to carry off the whole of it. The workman would not hold it long enough to get it warm before the landlord would tell him that owing to the great demand for houses incident to the lower street-car fares he was very sorry to inform him that land values and rents had gone up, and that as a consequence he must expect to pay an advanced rent hereafter for his house. The landlord might also tell him that it would not be felt because the saving on car fare that he and his family would make every month would offset the increase in rent. Then, if there were anything left, the Beef Trust might find it out and put up the price of its beef, and so on right down along the line until the two cents would simply be a misty memory. Yet the main indictment I have agaiust a political pro- gram limited to Public Ownership is the one I dwelt mostly upon in my speech before the Allied Party Convention, viz:, that it takes no note of the tendency of our industrial develop- ment shortly to bring about a great unemployed problem. The trusts mean that the creation of new machinery, which has so long given employment to labor, is now about to come to an end simply because there is no new machinery to create, a problem for which Public Ownership offers absolutely no solution, inasmuch as its cause lies in the competitive wage system which the public ownership people do not seem to have the faintest idea of abolishing. There is but one way of abolishing the competitive wage system, and that is by the substitution of the co-operative wage system, otherwise Socialism. The argument that Socialism is impracticable, while Public Ownership is practicable, is just the reverse of the truth. In the first place, Public Ownership, as we have shown, is im- practicable because it fails to answer the most important of all the political questions of the future, namely, that of the unemployed problem. In the next place, even were there no unemployed problem to be solved, the Nationalization of 52 Socialism Inevitable Industry, if put into effect upon any considerable scale, would create such a revolutionary change in our industrial and financial affairs that it would surely be a precursor of a revolutionary social movement. Suppose we accomplish the first impossibility and get the trust-owned Congress either to grant us the Initiative and Referendum, by which we could get Public Ownership our- selves, or grant it to us direct. To me it seems absurd that either of these events could take place. The trusts may make some concessions to public opinion, but they will hardly com- mit suicide. Let us suppose, however, that Congress does nationalize the trusts and the railroads. Of course, in any partial nation- alizing process we must manifestly pay the owners for their property. They must be paid, for confiscation would mean revolution right then and there. Hence, there would be placed in their hands an enormous sum of floating capital in the shape of cash or bonds, and the owners would have the rest of the world at their mercy. It would mean, when Mr. Eockefeller sold his Standard Oil Trust, and Mr. Morgan his Steel Trust, and Mr. Yanderbilt his Railway Trust to Uncle Sam, that these three gentlemen would have in their hands funds enough to give them the control of the whole of the remaining industries in the United States. They could and not only could, but undoubtedly would, expro- priate every last one of the smaller capitalists whose business had not been sufficiently trustified to make the Public Owner- ship people think that it was necessary to nationalize them. Hence I declare that Public Ownership is a poor platform politically, because it fails to hold up any great ideal to arouse the enthusiasm of the people. It is a poor platform economically, because it would fail to answer the unemployed problem, and, moreover, it could not possibly be put in opera- tion without causing a social revolution. It is a poor plat- form ethically, because it recognizes the right of a class, and one no better because somewhat smaller than the present capitalist class, to live of the fruits of the toil of another class. The Trust Overshadows All Issues 53 THE TRUST OVERSHADOWS ALL ISSUES (July, 1902.) THAT the Trust would sooner or later be the great issue in American politics I have never once doubted for the last fifteen years. My surprise to-day is, not that it has suddenly become so important an issue, but that it has been so long about it. In 1884 I was managing director of the Kiyerside Eolling Mill Co., of Cincinnati, Ohio. The price of iron that year was steadily falling, and the end of things seemed in sight. If we wished to sell our iron we had to meet a market that had already forced us to manufacture at less than cost, and there appeared to be no prospect of future improvement. There was certainly no way that we could lower the cost of producing, for we bought our ore and coal at the lowest market price, and our day labor received a wage that only too obviously admitted of no reduction. The men, indeed, were already on the verge of starvation, except our skilled labor, which was paid upon the scale of the Amalgamated Iron Workers, and that allowed us no option about reduction. We had either to pay the scale or shut up shop. I was young in business in those days, fresh from Harvard College, and I used to wonder how long the world could get along on the basis of everybody losing money. For, after finding out that there was nothing in the iron business, I naturally looked into other lines of manufacture, and saw that my own was in no exceptional condition. Every manu- facturer that I talked with, in fact, had the same story to tell of the impossibility of making a living with the existing low prices, and I finally became so discouraged with the out- look that I made up my mind the only thing to produce, that seemed to be sure of a market at a standard price, was gold. When you get your ounce of gold it is always worth your twenty dollars, and this sort of a business seemed infinitely 54 Socialism Inevitable better than iron manufacturing, where the price of the prod- uct steadily fell below that originally expected. It is true that Mr. Rockefeller and his Standard Oil Trust had already, even in that early day, shown how to prevent over-production and get a fixed price for the product, but I did not see how I could ever wait long enough for the iron men to get sense enough to follow Mr. Rockefeller's example. It is well, too, that I did not wait. It took those iron manu- facturers eighteen years from 1884 to 1902 to do what they should have had the sense to have done at once. Indeed, how they ever managed to survive those eighteen long years has been a great surprise to me, although I know that it is not four years since a good many of them, who are now on "easy street" through the formation of the Morgan Trust, were on the verge of bankruptcy. While I was investigating gold mining prospects, which, by the way, did not prove to be particularly rosy, because the uncertainty of one's product fully offsets the certainty of the selling price, I happened to be thrown by a fractious horse in the mountains of California, and suffered a broken jaw. Although I was not an "agitator" in those days, nevertheless I felt my jaw an important enough member of my ego to justify a trip to Southern California to allow it an oppor- tunity to consolidate to form a little trust of its own, so to speak. While there, the real estate boom came on, and at last I saw an opportunity of buying something land which looked as if it would sell at a profit ; hence I gave up my deter- mination to go in for gold mining and became a real estate shark. The results were only fairly satisfactory. For a year or two it was possible to buy land and sell it at a considerable profit; then the boom busted, and, so far as I could see, the problem of selling for more than cost was as impossible of solution as ever, unless one could form a trust.* This was in 1888. Since then there have been ups and downs in business, but principally "downs" for most men, and the "downs" had the game all to themselves, apparently, until after McKinley's first election, when the Cuban war stirred up trade so much by the destruction of property, and the consequent demand for goods of all kinds, that the "ups" have been very much in evidence ever since. The Trust Overshadows All Issues 55 A little prosperity, however, has not made them blind to the advantages a trust has in making assurance doubly sure. If we had not had the war, the trusts would have been formed as a matter of absolute necessity. As it is, they may pos- sibly be regarded more as a matter of expediency, although I think most of the insiders in the trusts to-day would admit that in forming their trusts they had only forestalled an inevitability. Now I think that my experience in business since the year 1884 is more or less typical of that of other business men in America. We all realize that the only way to make money is to get into a monopoly, and if that cannot be done then the best thing is to stay out of business. But there happen to be so many people who must make a living somehow, people who neither get into a trust nor stay out of business, that there is considerable dissatisfaction in the land among these outsiders. They may be very inconsiderate to pester us so with their weeping and wailing; but we must take men as they are. Men are, primarily, and above everything else, eating animals; and, after all, an animal is simply an intelligent automobile, carrying around an ever hungry stomach. If they cannot obtain food they are sure to make unpleasant remarks; and if to feed themselves it is necessary to own a trust, and there are not enough trusts to go around, then those who get left are sure to become ill-natured and generally troublesome. Now it so happens in the trust lottery that the fellows who draw blanks are so far in the majority that if it came to a matter of voting there is not the remotest doubt who would win. But while the winners of the trust prizes are few in number, they make up for this paucity in brains, and they also know enough to hire other brains to do some of their thinking for them. What they are mortally afraid of just now is that the business men who are fated to draw blanks will object to the entire system of play; hence the main object of the winners is to persuade the losers to continue in the game by feeding them with fairy stories of how, by some change in the rules, they will yet be able to win back their losses. At the present stage of the game, it is the capitalists that 56 Socialism Inevitable have been squeezed by the trusts, who are dissatisfied ; while the workingmen are largely disinterested onlookers. It is true that the Beef Trust has attracted considerable criticism by the high price of beef, and many workingmen who have hitherto regarded the Trust problem as one simply of academic interest, with no immediate application to their daily life, have suddenly sat up and taken notice. However, the price of beef will fall, or wages will adapt themselves, and that episode will prove to be simply an accidental note in the song of monopoly. The merchants and manufacturers, on the other hand, who have lost their power to conduct an inde- pendent competitive business alongside of the Trust, are naturally up in arms against an invasion which threatens their commercial existence. Thus, when the Trust problem is represented as overshadowing all other issues, what is really meant is that the smaller capitalists, who are vastly in the majority, are demanding legislation to curtail the growth of monopoly. So far in the United States political issues have merely been clashes between the different interests of the capitalists. It is true that the interest of the workingman, and of the country as a whole, has always been the ostensible interest of both parties, but this has only been a mask used for the pur- pose of gaining votes. For instance, take the tariff issue. The manufacturers wanted a high tariff to increase their profits, but they said they wanted it in order to pay higher wages. On the other hand the farmers wanted a low tariff so as to reduce the cost of the various commodities they re- quired, but they said they wanted it because the lower prices would enable the workingmen to buy the necessities of life, including farm products. So, to-day, the smaller capitalists want the trusts crushed because otherwise they themselves will be crushed. Yet, as it would never do to go before the country with such a purely selfish cry, a demand for the legislative protection of their own particular class, they add such reasons for the aboli- tion of the Trust as they think will appeal to the work- ingmen and the country at large. First, they say the Trust, by holding a complete monopoly of the essentials of life, is placing the whole nation at its mercy. The Trust Overshadows All Issues 57 Second, by reason of the undoubted economies that the Trust has introduced in the production of goods, it is threat- ening the working class with a huge unemployed problem. Of course both these indictments are correct, but what I wish to call attention to is that the smaller capitalists would never have considered either the "country as a whole," or the working class in particular, had it not been that their own in- terests were in jeopardy and required outside aid. I am not blaming them for this. It was a perfectly natural proceeding. Men are not expected to attend to other people's interests; they are usually too busy looking after their own. However, just as these same smaller capitalists could never be induced to take action until the Trust had actually compelled them to look financial death in the face, so the working class will delay taking action until they are placed in the same relative position. The appeal to the working class to rally to the support of the smaller capitalists will therefore be in vain. The workingman will continue to vote as in the past until an economic condition presents itself directly to him that will compel his attention. Judging from the following editorial, the Detroit Tribune thinks that such a condition has already presented itself. THE ALARM OF LABOR IS NATURAL. Trust control of any industry means the application of trust methods. Trust method means the systematic elimination of every item of cost that can be dispensed with. It means the substitution of cunning mechanism for human handiwork as far as possible. It means the substitution of women and children for men in every department where men can be thus displaced. It means a reduction of prices just to the exact point that will squeeze out competition. Then follows absolute control of price and product. A case that is very much in the public eye is that of the Brown cigar factory. It was operated under a system by which young girls became competitors of men in cigar making. Their product went out in competition with that of skilled laborers. Now an- other step is being taken which will multiply the effectiveness of the trust operative. The displacing of a certain number of girls from their employment in a given factory is the lesser evil, although that is bad enough for those who are dependent upon such employment and are the support or partial support of a family. Trust control must by its constant reduction in the cost of production seriously affect the independent factories and their workmen who make a specialty of hand work. It is possible that 58 Socialism Inevitable the future of such Industries may not be as bad as it looks, but the operatives cannot be blamed for exhibiting serious alarm for their jobs and hostility to the new system. Overlooking the complacent manner in which the Tribune regards a system which forces girls to support their families as a perfectly natural and satisfactory one, and the inference that anything which tends to prevent the perpetuation of such a system must be viewed with abhorrence, I would deny the general proposition that the working class, as a class, are ready to take any decided stand against the Trust in its present stage of development. I say this simply because the unemployed problem is not aggravated sufficiently to induce any considerable part of them to think. The capitalist's political brains are found in his pocket-book; the working- man's are in his stomach. The capitalist, indeed, finds the trusts emptying his pocket- book. I have been warning him that this event was sure to happen, warning him for fifteen years or more, but he would never listen. In fact even now that the money is actually going, while he is objecting strenuously enough, he has hardly yet come to listen to the advice I offer him. He still wishes to destroy the trusts : I tell him, Let the Nation Own the Trust. This, of course, is too radical a solution for him to adopt, although, judging from the editorials in the Hearst papers demanding the National Ownership of trusts, I should judge that the tide is setting pretty strong in that direction. Mr. Hearst, indeed, has too much good newspaper sense to run very far ahead of public opinion. His aim is to give his readers such ideas as he thinks are in commercial demand, albeit he usually selects the more radical kind. I, on the other hand, give my readers the kind of ideas they ought to like. I am like a temperance barkeeper, who, when a customer asks for whiskey, puts him off with ginger ale. This is not usually a good commercial policy, and, in fact, is so unheard of that when Mr. Madden refused me the use of the United States mails to disseminate my own hand-made ideas instead of the ordinary ones manufactured in quantities for the general newspaper trade, he had the endorsement of President Eoosevelt and of the whole tribe of American poli- ticians, together with the daily press. In the meantime, while the small capitalist is shilly-shally- The Trust Overshadows All Issues 59 ing with the Trust problem, allowing President Roosevelt to fool him with ridiculous actions in the United States Supreme Court, and at the same time praying to the workingman to come to his aid, the latter is beginning to study the problem from his own standpoint. The promise made by the small capitalist is that the waste of labor engendered by this going back to the methods of production on a small scale will be sure to make his labor much more in demand than at present. If he destroys the Trust he will have good wages and a steady job. That there is something in this argument cannot be denied, as there was in the logic of the hand-weavers who, in 1838, tried to destroy the machinery that was taking away their livelihood. The proposition, viewing it politically, is simply this, "Can there be a sufficient number rallied in support of a movement to prevent economic development Y* If not, then the movement must proceed. And since the increase in the use of machinery has never yet been stayed because men were thrown out of employment by its use, there is no reason why the future should differ from the past. A boy may wish to remain a boy, but he grows into a man all the same. I have referred to the steady process of economic evolution finally forcing the working class into a very pronounced atti- tude on the question of the trusts, but the stage at which this event will occur is not during a period of so-called prosperity such as we are now enjoying. It will come during a time of depression, which may be expected just as soon as the demand for new machinery has so decreased that the demand for labor to build such machinery falls off sufficiently to create an unemployed problem. The Trust presages that such a condition is rapidly approaching. Now the Trust is primarily a device on the part of the capitalist to prevent price-cutting as the result of overproduc- tion, which, in turn, is caused by the competitive wage system limiting wages to approximately what it costs the working- man to live. We have, by the use of machinery, largely augmented the product of the workingman, but he has shared hardly at all in this increased productivity. The increase has gone direct to the capitalist, who uses it in the production of still more machinery, until he finds himself with more than GO Socialism Inevitable he can use, and is compelled to form a trust to prevent over- production. The first economic effect of the Trust is to force the sur- render of other manufacturing capitalists engaged in the same line of production; the next point of attack is the capitalists engaged in distributing its products. For instance, the American Tobacco Trust first captured most of the competing establishments manufacturing tobacco. After that it went after the wholesalers and jobbers and forced them to abandon handling any competitive brands. By this means it forced the surrender of those recalcitrant competitive manufacturing establishments who would not surrender on direct assault. They were starved out by a siege. Their market was cap- tured by simply blocking the avenue by which they sold their goods and derived their profits. It is thus seen that the first people to rise up in arms against the Trust are naturally those first attacked, namely, the smaller competing manufacturers, and the distributive establishments, capitalists, and not workingmen. These, I repeat, are the men who are now doing most of the howling, and from them, very largely, comes the cry for workingmen in particular, and the public in general, to rush to their aid and destroy the Trust in order that they, the capitalists, may live. When the people do not respond with that alacrity which they supposed they would show, these small fry capitalists throw up their hands to heaven and cry that the country is "going to destruction" ; in short, they confuse their own petty inter- ests with those of the country at large. We can well dispense with these little capitalists, and even with the jobbers and wholesalers, and, as a nation, suffer no permanent harm, for it is the usual process of nature to eliminate the unnecessary. Years ago the farmer cried that the middle man must go. He is going. However, the day will come, and it is rapidly approaching, when the Trust will say to the working class, "You have built up the manufac- turing plants of this country to such an extent and io such perfection that we do not require your services to build any more, and we do not require many of you to operate those already built, so automatic has your ingenuity made them.'* The Trust Overshadows All Issues 61 Then may we expect the working class at last to awaken to the real significance of the Trust. Hence, the workingman will vote for the Public Ownership of trusts only when lack of employment will force him to do so. In like manner the smaller capitalists made no move when they simply had the theory of the Trust expounded to them : they had to see the Trust actually throttling them be- fore they could realize their danger. Why should the working class be any clearer sighted than those capitalists? There is no reason to expect it. They, too, will decline to move until conditions drive them to, and the only hope I have of seeing any concerted movement from them in the near future is simply that I foresee conditions where they will have but one chance of escaping starvation from an unemployed prob- lem. That chance will be the adoption of the Co-operative Wage System, Public Ownership of the Trusts and Means of Production. 62 Socialism Inevitable A PROPHECY OF 1891 (August, 1902.) (An excerpt from my preface to the American edition of the Fabian Essays, published by the Humboldt Publish- ing Co., of New York, in June, 1891.) TO the American readers of these essays, it may prove a matter of surprise to learn that English Socialists find in the United States the most pronounced eco- nomic phenomena, which, to their eyes at least, seem to prog- nosticate the near approach of the coming social revolution. I refer to the trusts. It may be remarked, however, that while they consider the Trust as a symptom that the competitive system is in its last throes, they wait for the appearance of similar industrial combinations to stir Englishmen to a revolt; whereupon Americans, as if to square the account of "76, are to learn revolution from their trans- Atlantic cousins. By "revolution" is to be understood, of course, not violence, but a complete change of system; and by "revolutionists/' those who advocate such a complete change. As Lassalle reminded us years ago, trifling reforms may be, and often have been, accompanied by excessive bloodshed, while revolutions have worked themselves out in the profoundest tranquility. It seems to be typical of all social revolutionists that, no matter how much patriotism may be decried as mere racial selfishness, their national pride invariably asserts itself when- ever the discussion arises as to which nation will take the lead in throwing off the shackles of capitalism. The Fabian essayists certainly make out a strong case in England's favor ; the Germans point with pride to the million and a half votes polled by the Socialists at the last election for the Keichstag; France, the mother of revolutions, sings the Marseillaise; Belgians ask but for universal suffrage to show the world what they will do in the way of revolution, A Prophesy of 1891 63 and I, as an American Socialist, put forth my patriotic plea that my own country bids fair to rank first in the inauguration of Industrial Democracy. There is one point, however, upon which I think all Social- ists are agreed, namely, that it is one and the same golden chain that fetters the proletariat of all nations; and that the weakest link in that chain is the measure of the strength of the present social system. Snap but one link in any country, and at the same moment the proletariat of the world are free. The social revolution, when it does come, must undoubtedly be international, though resting for a period, perhaps, upon national Socialism. Imagine, for instance, that on gaining universal suffrage, Belgium's proletariat should expropriate the capitalists and inaugurate a successful co-operative com- monwealth. Is it possible to conceive that workingmen of all nations would not make a successful demand for the es- tablishment of a like social system in their own respective countries ? Moreover, the general industrial condition of the great nations is approximately the same. All complain of over-production; all are vainly trying to solve the question of the unemployed; all show a like tendency to great social change; and in all the great capitalists, crushing out their smaller rivals, and concentrating wealth into fewer and fewer hands, are the true progenitors of the revolution. Now the American people, the nation that certainly fur- nishes the best educational facilities for demonstrating the advantages of the concentration and crystallization of capital, should naturally and logically be the first to strike for eco- nomic freedom. To-day, in the United States, there are 50,000 people, out of a population of more than sixty-three millions, who own practically everything worth having, while there are four men, viz., Gould, Astor, Vanderbilt, and Kocke- feller, who, in a large measure control, and, what is more important are rapidly absorbing, the wealth of this 50,000. The day is not so very far distant, and a sociologist can pre- dict almost its exact appearance, just as an astronomer calcu- lates the date of an eclipse of the sun, when, if no structural change in society takes place, these four men will be the sole owners of the United States. I think that if such a state of affairs should come about, no one will differ with me when I 64 Socialism Inevitable say that it would force a reconstruction of society. In other words, the sixty odd millions of people may now rest undis- turbed, and allow a plutocracy of 50,000 to own their country; but when it shall come to having only four own it, patience will cease to be a virtue. That the tendency of the wealth of the United States is to concentrate into larger and larger masses, held by a con- stantly diminishing number of capitalists, is not disputed by anyone at all familiar with the statistics of the case. This process continued and followed to its logical conclusion must lead inevitably to Socialism. If Gould & Co. are not to own the railways and telegraphs, the land and machinery, there can be but one possible successor, viz., the people, as repre- sented by the government. The only possible chance of retarding the approach of Socialism is to stop the tendency of capital to congeal in a few hands. Some plan must be devised to prevent Gould and Vanderbilt gobbling up more railways; to keep Astor's hands off city lots, and to check Rockefeller's insatiable and omnivorous appetite for industrial plants. Now it requires but slight intelligence to comprehend that neither a high nor a low tariff, nor free trade, would appreciably effect Vander- bilt's income; and fiscal legislation, whether it takes the form of the free coinage of silver, lending money on crops, or increasing paper money until the circulation is $50 or even $5,000 per capita all this will never divert the Pac- tolian stream which flows into Mr. Gould's golden reservoir. Even the nationalization of the railways and telegraphs, although proposed as a reactionary measure calculated to en- able farmers, by obtaining lower freight rates, to increase their margin of profit sufficiently to hold their own as inde- pendent producers, would, if put into effect, but precipitate the very event which it is hoped to retard. For the govern- ment ownership of railways, it is well to remember, would involve the payment of several thousand million dollars to the present owners, all of which must seek reinvestment. Senator Carlisle's objection, however, based upon the difficulty of raising the money for such a purchase is trivial, the credit of the United States being good enough to float bonds for many times the amount required, although the purchase at their present fancy valuation of watered stocks would be u A Prophesy of 1891 65 utterly unwise and unnecessary. The main difficulty in order to avoid a great unemployed problem, as stated, would be for the present owners to find a safe and profitable place to re- invest the thousands of millions of dollars received in ex- change for their railways, and the channels for the profitable investment of such a large amount of money are certainly not visible. It could not be spent in building new oil refineries, as Mr. Eockefeller, of the Standard Oil Trust, is armed with statistics to prove that there are too many oil refineries already. The same blockade against the entrance of fresh capital into the sugar refining is also sure to be encountered, as Mr. Havemeyer, of that trust, says that he is compelled to shut down part of the refineries already in existence, to prevent the unprofitable over-production which would otherwise ensue. That there is absolutely no chance to-day to invest any con- siderable amount of capital in building new machinery of production in the United States, is a palpable truism with financiers, and the only remaining opening would be to pur- chase existing plants, which would simply be shifting the investment problem from one capitalist to another, and usually from the large capitalist to the small one. The nationalization of the railways in the United States would therefore mean the immediate expropriation of all small capitalists by the big ones. If Gould, Vanderbilt & Company cannot own railways, they will invest their money, both principal and income, in flour mills, gas works, cotton factories, etc., and the former owners of those industries will soon be enlisted in the ranks of the proletariat under the banner of Socialism. That is, the nationalization of the railways could not possibly be effected without causing the crystallization of all capital invested in the other industries in the hands of such a comparatively small number of owners' hat the advent of Socialism would be almost instantaneous. The problem of giving work to the unemployed, although not at present a threatening one in the United States, is destined soon to become one of the utmost importance. There are, at present, according to Carroll D. Wright's governmental statistics, an average of over one million able-bodied men in the United States willing, yet unable, to find employment. The pressure of these upon the ranks of the employed effectu- ally prevents wages rising above the point of mere subsistence. 66 Socialism Inevitable Hence the very fact that we have such a vast and fertile territory, and such ingenious labor-saving machinery, to- gether with an industrious and intelligent population, tends to make the problem of the unemployed but the more threat- ening, since these very elements only conduce to an enormous product per capita, with no corresponding methods of dis- tribution. The old-time argument, that our great farming population, with its members all owning their own homes, would always prove an insuperable barrier to Socialism in the United States, is completely out of date nowadays, since the greater part of our farmers are already proletarians, while the few that still own their own farms are hopelessly in debt, and even now are demanding the most Socialistic measures, such as national warehouses for grain, and the nationalization of railways. Considering how near at hand is the great social metamor- phosis, I would earnestly advise the reader of these exceed- ingly clever and able essays to give them the deepest thought. They express clearly the nature of the crisis through which we are now passing, a crisis in which none who well under- stands it can fail to be vitally interested. We are now swing- ing on the hinge of destiny, we are in the transition stage of the greatest sociologic event that history has yet recorded. Let him who runs, read. The Tkue Joy or Life 67 THE TRUE JOY OF LIFE (September, 1902.) THERE is but one true Elixir of Life, and that is to live. A great many people think they live when in reality they are letting their bodies and souls undergo a pro- cess of decay. Some who are sure they are living are simply burning themselves up. Really to live and be respectable under modern conditions is possible but for a favored min- ority favored either by heredity or environment, or both, and of these there are but a fraction who take advantage of their possibilities. The difficulties of steering a career be- tween eminent respectability and disgraceful dissipation are so great that few escape wrecking their souls. Now, the very first requisite of respectability is to conform your thoughts and actions to those of the community among whom you happen to be thrown. A buried corpse conforms to its surrounding soil, and finally becomes undistinguishable from the soil itself. It is the soil. A buried acorn, on the other hand, is a thing of life because it refuses conformity, and becomes the glorious oak. The dead man is always respectable; the live man never, if he really lives. On the other hand, it is just as fatal to dissipate or burn up your energies in leading a life which the respectable call disre- putable, as it is to deaden yourself by the life that the dis- reputable sneer at as "respectable." To live is simply to express yourself physically and spir- itually. You cannot live if you do not express yourself, and you are not expressing yourself when you think, speak and act, not in your own way, but after the manner of some one else because it is respectable. We live for the sake of experiencing emotions. Every natural movement of the mind or body gives us a pleasur- able sensation, and it is only when we are unable to exercise our functions properly and normally that the ungratified desires lead to the use of narcotics or stimulants. A man 68 Socialism Inevitable working all day in a dismal coal mine, and denied the sight of the beauties of nature, develops, unconsciously perhaps, an intense longing for the sight of trees and grass and flowers and sunshine. But he cannot satisfy that longing: to sup- port life he must stay in the mine. Is it then any wonder that he craves whiskey, which would in a measure substitute the sensations that his nature so imperatively demands? Granted that the exhilaration caused by the whiskey is alto- gether of a baser kind than that induced by the sight of a green field, it does, at least, take the man away from himself and his environment, an effect that seems a psychological necessity to those living unnatural lives. It is well enough for the man whose everyday life seems a dream in the eyes of the miner, to berate the latter for his drunkenness; but he should bear in mind that the only time the miner ever feels that he is living is when he can escape his actual environment by so deadening his nerves with whiskey that reality becomes subordinate to an imaginary condition. We universally excuse a man for permitting himself to be drugged when he is about to undergo a surgical operation, and if whiskey, instead of ether, were used for the anaesthetic, no one would think of censuring him. Moreover, for weeks after the operation, the man may be in pain, but we do not frown upon his taking opium. Let him recover, however, and then take opium or whiskey to rid himself of a spiritual pain, and we at once regard him with scorn, notwithstanding the general admission that his suffering may be greater than that of any mere physical ailment. It is natural for man to shrink from pain, or, if he cannot escape the pain itself, to do the next best thing deaden himself to the sensation. A healthy man in a natural, healthful environment will never think of narcotizing himself. He will not wish to lose any of his sensations any of his life. When a man goes to the opera, he certainly does not take a sleeping potion beforehand. On the contrary, he wants to be fully alive in order to enjoy every moment. Nor could you think of a man wishing to get drunk in heaven. It is an absurdity. Yet if he happened to be in hell, who would blame the poor fellow for getting as drunk as he could, and staying that way as long as his satanic host would furnish the high-balls? The The True Joy of Life 69 true course of the temperance reformer is to make this world so little like hell and so nearly like heaven that no one will dare get drunk for fear of missing part of the show. And it must always be remembered that a heaven on this earth implies something for us to do, some task to perform that we feel, and know, is useful to ourselves and to mankind in general. We cannot enjoy a full life by plowing the sands. Digging post holes and filling them up again may exercise our muscles, but it is deadly to the soul. Conjugating Greek verbs and never getting any further in the language may be excellent intellectual discipline, but it would never make a scholar. To enjoy digging the post holes we must know that they are to be filled by posts, and that the fence, or whatever it may be, is something that performs a useful function. We can take pleasure in the study of Greek verbs only when we know that it will lead to the enjoyment of Greek literature. It is the uselessness of the sports of the rich that poisons them. Young Vanderbilt feels this when he runs a stage coach for hire. To drive a coach and four every day up and down the pike without "paying passengers" becomes monoton- ous, but let the driver know that every man has paid for his seat, and immediately there is added a sense of usefulness to the coach driving that gives it the zest and flavor of life. When we have reorganized society it is quite true that the demand for useful labor to produce the necessities of life will be extremely small. At the outside two hours a day will give every man all needed food, shelter and clothing. Men will not use champagne and cigars, because they will not wish to deaden their senses in a world of love and beauty, nor will there be any incentive to the individual ownership of expensive things, since such ownership to-day is desired only for the sake of ostentation, a motive that will entirely dis- appear with the effacement of a system which enables one man to take the wealth produced by another. But while the demand for necessities will be immeasurable, architecture, the greatest of arts, will consume men's labor and time to an unparalleled and unimaginable extent. Such buildings as? we have seen at the World's Fair will be con- structed on a far grander scale, and of permanent material, in every State in the Union, built not only for the joy of 70 Socialism Inevitable seeing them after completion, but for the actual pleasure of building them We know how the cathedrals of the middle ages were erected by singing workmen. If they sang and loved their work in those days, how much more will labor in the future enjoy its work when mankind is filled with that con- sciousness of universal goodwill which can come only when all men are brothers, and join in the great work of making life beautiful? Not till the race has developed into a complete and world- wide organism will the individual really live. Then and only then will man's heart throb in unison with the heart-beats of all humanity, Two Would Conquerobs 71 TWO WORLD CONQUERORS (September, 1902.) ALEXANDEE sighed when he had no more worlds to conquer, but when Morgan completes his conquest, the world, not he, will do the sighing. It will sigh be- cause it will be unemployed. Such is the difference between the achievements of the two men, and a mighty big differ- ence it is, let me remark. If Alexander had not overeaten at that famous dinner, and so died of indigestion, he might easily have served out his allotted time of life. The dinner was an accident. There was no need of his gorging himself to death; he might have lived as abstemiously as John D. Kockefeller, that is, had he possessed a modern liver. But men did not have livers in those heroic days, and so Alexander had to die an ignominious death. We have learned something, however, in the last few thousand years. Thanks to Bernarr Macfadden, we now eat only when we are hungry, that is, if we have the sense and the cents for we must have both. Alexander had to f ufil but one condition to hold his throne ; he had to keep his health. In fact, this was about the one essential in feudal days. With good health and reasonable luck and intelligence, most kings could be pretty sure of keep- ing their jobs. With our new world-emperor, Mr. Morgan, on the other hand, it is not a question of health but of wealth, of his ability to continue making money at his job. I don't mean that Morgan himself would abdicate his throne if he found there were nothing "in it." I mean that Morgan to-day holds his sceptre by reason of his ability to give employment both to men and capital, or, to be more correct, because of the fact that such employment results in profit. For Morgan does not, and cannot, create industrial conditions. He simply takes advantage of the conditions as they exist in the indus- trial world, and it so happens to-day that labor and capital 72 Socialism Inevitamli; can be reasonably well employed; hence Morgan's reign of peace. He came to his throne because of a great over-produc- tion of the industrial machinery of the United States which necessitated the formation of vast combinations of railways and industrial enterprises. Morgan, as a great banker, was called in by the capitalists to conduct the formation of these combinations. The war with Spain coming on, and after- wards the Boer War, caused a great demand for commodities, which was followed up by a corresponding increase in price. The new Morgan combinations not only profited directly by all this, but succeeded in effecting vast economies in produc- tion, thus still further augmenting profits. Profits certainly never amounted to such a prodigious sum as to-day in the United States. Morgan's Steel Trust is earn- ing at the rate of nearly $140,000,000 a year. The -result of all this prosperity is naturally being followed up by vast expenditures, so as to perfect still further the machinery of production and profit-making. One railway company alone, the Pennsylvania, is about to expend $100,000,000 in better- ments. This, however, cannot last indefinitely. The day is fast approaching when the greater part of the work of perfecting the machinery of production will be finished. The Pennsyl- vania tunnel under the Hudson Kiver will cost $60,000,000 ; but certainly no one can think that when it is finished that there will be immediate need of another tunnel or of widen- ing the one just built. And even the wildest imagination can hardly dream of a third tunnel being built in the near future. It is the same with the immense amounts of money now being spent in improvements upon our railway systems. Heavier bridges and heavier rails are the order of the day. But when the new rails are laid and the bridges strengthened it will be years before they will wear out. That the business men of this country do not look for an indefinite continuation of good times is seen in the market price of the preferred stock of the United States Steel Com- pany. Here is Schwab in an affidavit valuing the assets at more than thirteen hundred million dollars and claiming that the earnings for the year will be more than one hundred and forty millions, whereas the fixed charges are less than Two World Conquerors 73 sixteen millions. Notwithstanding all this, the seven per cent, preferred stock of the company sells for less than ninety cents, while our United States bonds paying two per cent, sell for 108. The only possible reason for a seven per cent, selling below a two per cent, investment is because of the uncertainty of the former being permanent. Yet, according to Mr. Schwab, the only chance of the Steel Company failing to pay its seven per cent, would be an almost inconceivable demoralization in the iron industry of the country. And the low price of steel stock, to my mind, indicates exactly such a feeling of uncer- tainty and foreboding in the minds of the investing public. Even the "gift" of $4,000,000 a year, in the form of increased wages paid by the Trust, has not to any measurable extent reassured the public mind. One thing it does show, however, is that Schwab is a man of discernment. He saw that he would sooner or later be forced to give higher wages, owing to the increased cost of living, and simply took time by fhe forelock; and so by anticipating the men's demands, gets credit for great philanthropy. If he had waited for a strike and then given in, he would have shown much poorer judg- ment. The iron industry of this country pays the railway com- panies between sixty and seventy million dollars a year for transportation. Now, if we are going to have such a falling off in the demand for iron that the Steel Trust will fail to pay dividends upon its preferred stock, it certainly means that a great part of the millions it is now paying the railway com- panies is going to be lost to them. The collapse of the steel and iron industry, therefore, means the collapse of the railway industry, and, in fact, of practically all the industries in the country. I am predicting this by my words, but our capitalists are predicting it much more effec- tively, by deeds, when they refuse to buy Steel Trust stock at par. This is the pyramid of human money bags upon which Mr. Morgan is perched and from which he views the world as his own the ability of the Steel Trust to pay dividends. So long as capitalists want steel rail, just so long will the Steel Trust employ men digging iron ore, conveying it in vessels and trains to the mills, and transporting the finished 74 Socialism Inevitable article to its destination. But the question of their "wanting" steel is not a question of volition. They only "want" when there is a demand, and this demand can exist only when there are economic conditions which create such a demand. It is beyond the power of the capitalists to create "conditions"; they may, by foresight and combination, succeed in modify- ing conditions ; but the general current of industry, under our existing competitive system, is entirely beyond their control. It is true that if Mr. Morgan were the Director General of the whole of the world's capital, he could manage better to keep things going until all the world were perfectly equipped with the latest industrial machinery. But with this accomplished, and having nothing more to do with his in- come, he would at last be compelled from the very necessity of things to introduce the co-operative wage system to get rid of his money. Morgan, however, is not in complete control of the world's capital, although he seems rapidly approaching it. He must consider other competing capitalists, and either husband or waste his capital as the exigencies of the com- petitive strife demand. Morgan, in short, is not a free agent, although freer than any capitalist that the world has yet seen. Take his position in the industrial world to-day, particularly in connection with the great iron industry. He is the whole thing from beginning to end. He controls the iron ore, the vessels carrying the ore, the furnaces making the ore into pig iron, the conversion of the iron into steel, the rolling of the steel into beams and steel rail. He not only controls the railways which buy the steel rail, but he controls the great companies which use steel in the construction of buildings and steam- ships. In fact, he performs every act in the whole scale of industry from the very beginning up to the last act of con- sumption. Nevertheless, Morgan, as a capitalist, is just as limited in his powers of consumption as Morgan, the individual, is limited in his powers of eating. As a capitalist, he can have indigestion from too much capital, just as a man can have in- digestion from too much food. The body is an organism, more or less perfect, that can consume only so much food, and so the body politic, whether Morganized or simply organized, can consume only so much capital. The best Morgan can do Two World Conquerors 75 for his body is to keep it well organized and exercised, and not to feed it either too much or too little; and if he could perform the same service for society he would be safe in holding his throne as emperor of the world. But he can't, that is, unless he supplants the existing com- petitive wage system by the co-operative system; and this change can never be made for society. It must be made by society of its own accord and motion, for itself. A man may cultivate the soil and plant a rose bush, but he cannot make it blossom. The bush must do that for itself. All the gar- dener can do is to hasten or retard the event. Now, society is simply a human rose bush, with somewhat more sense than the common, or garden variety. Morgan is only a part of society and can contribute only his part of that social con- sciousness which will cause us to know that some day we are to blossom into Socialism. Our physical body may be described as an organization of living cells. Each cell looks out for itself, but it can only do so by helping to keep the whole body in a condition of health so that it can derive its proper sustenance from it in turn for the sustenance that it gives the body. If anything goes wrong with a cell, for instance, if the cells in the legs be- come tired by too much walking, they first give a civil warning that they must have a rest, and finally if they don't get what they want, they go on strike and won't work at all. Then the body must come to their relief. Hence the cells occupy the position of the coal miners in society to-day who first make a demand and then finally go on strike to get what they want. Indeed, if they had the sense of the cells in the body they would get what they want or society would go cold. The latest theory of cancer is that it is simply an ordinary cell that has gone crazy and determined to set up a little imperium in imperio of its own. It wants to be the whole thing itself. It levies on all the tissues of the body just as if it had the right to claim a separate organization as well as the body. The body cannot stand this rebellion. It finally weakens under the stress of civil war, and, unless it subdues the cancer, it dies. The Trust is a cancer on the body politic. It is an organ- ization gone wild which thinks that the sustenance intended for the whole of society should be diverted to it. At one time 76 Socialism Inevitable it was the feudal king who took, to himself the wealth in- tended for all, but to-day it is the money king who usurps the rights of society, and right royally he does it, too ! As Mr. Wayland says in the Appeal to Reason: In view of the hesitation in the world of stocks, bonds and gambling occasioned by the illness of the English king, a finan- cial report says that while the king was more ornamental than vital, 'he was a discreet and mute partner in many important enterprises.' In the olden times the king raised an army of free- booters and overrun and pillaged his neighbors where he could, and on the booty thus obtained lived in luxury. That was at least open and in a sense honorable. He made no pretense to be otherwise. To-day he takes the ways of business to accomplish the same ends. He invests in 'enterprises' that have for their object the taking away from the people the results of their labor, and appropriates them to his own use. He and his fellows secretly conspire against the rest of the human race to cheat them in the matter of price and cost, and extract millions from them to squander on idle ostentatious living. The king is a mere child in this to such as Morgan: combinations of men steal from the people a tiny speck on every mouthful of sugar, every drop of oil, every glimmer of electricity or gas, every mouthful of food, every rag of clothes. In this age we have not one king, but many, and many whose names even we never hear, or of whose existence we are unaware. Stores to-day have become so many tax-collecting offices for the men who own the trusts; the erst- while merchant is to-day but the collector in the cunning system of taxation without representation. We read and wonder at the stupidity and patience of the past generation in their submission to the tribute of kings, but they were never bled to one-tenth the extent the people are to-day by commercial kings, whose in- comes from the people are greater than any England's kings ever dreamed. We could better support five-fold the royalty and snobbery of England in their present useless lives than support the tens of thousands of tax-collecting vermin that swarm the industrial body of the people. What we pay for national and local taxes is nothing compared to the sums we have laid on us each year by the lice of capitalism. Go to any city and see the long line of mansions, palaces and exclusive pleasure places- inhabited by human beings who never do a useful stroke of labor, whose lives are spent in cunningly extracting from the workers the honey of wealth they produce, and you can readily see how insignificant the public taxes are compared to what it takes to keep up these drones. The income of a Rockefeller or a Morgan is greater than the royal income of all the royal families of all Europe. Yes, it is true that no feudal king ever had the twentieth part of Rockefeller's income, and it is precisely owing to this Two World Conquerors 77 enormous drain upon the people that capitalism will never have the long life enjoyed by feudalism. It is on the same principle that a man can endure a wart on his body much longer than a cancer. The kings and dukes were mere warts on society : the Kockefellers and Morgans are virulent cancers. The wart remains in nearly a static condition. It grows very slowly and draws but little nourishment from the system. Furthermore, it causes little pain or discomfort. Not so with the cancer. It grows every day, and the older it gets the more it drains the system, and the greater pain it causes. Now, when a man has a cancer, he doesn't expect to get rid of it by reasoning with the cancer and persuading it to leave his body. Not at all. He summons up his resolution and has it cut out. Nor does he bear any resentment against the cell which has gone wild and now threatens his life. If he is a scientist he knows that it is totally irresponsible. It is simply diseased, and if properly treated and put in a proper environment, will once again resume its rightful status in the body. The Trust cancer upon the American People is not yet at the open, virulent stage. It gives some annoyance; we all know that an abnormal growth is upon us; but we will not take measures for its removal until the disease assumes the acute form, and it becomes a matter of life and death with us to remove the false growth and correct the tendencies that brought it on. 78 Socialism Inevitable AN INTERNATIONAL OFFICE SEEKER (November, 1902.) New York, Sept. 12th, 1902. Gaylord Wilshire, Esq. 125 East 23d Street, New York City. Dear Comrade: The undersigned were appointed as a commit- tee to notify you that the Social Democratic Party Convention of the Tenth Congressional District of Manhattan, held on Septem- ber 5th, 1902, at 60 Second avenue, New York City, unanimously nominated you as candidate for Congress of the Social Demo- cratic Party in that district. The nomination was made in the interest of the Socialist cause which, we believe, will be furthered by your candidacy, and this we submit to your consideration as the chief inducement for your acceptance. There is no place in this country, and, therefore, in the world, where a Socialist gain or a Socialist victory can be of greater consequence to Socialism than in New York City, for New York City is incontestably the nervous centre of the United States. A blow struck at the capitalist system here will have the most telling effect. A Socialist victory in New York will thrill our friends the world over with joy and fill our foes with dismay. For a Socialist who can and will make a hard fight, such a victory in the Tenth District is undoubtedly possible. There is no necessity to dwell long on the reasons why we have chosen you for our standard bearer. For many years you have fought for the cause fearlessly and ably, both with speech and pen. Your name needs no introduction. It has become synonymous with Socialism. All who know you, know you as a true comrade in the Socialist ranks and a Royal Socialist in the Socialist movement. We urge you to accept the nomination offered to you, not as a favor, but in the interest of Socialism. We remain, Fraternally yours, Herman Reich, et al., Committee.* * Socialist Party is the name of the political organization of the Socialists in the United States, but owing to technical reasons which existed at that time in New York State, the name Social Democratic Party was used instead of Socialist Party. An International Office Seeker 79 1 THINK I must certainly be classed as the Champion International Peripatetic Office Seeker. Here I am again running for office in New York City, for of course, I accepted the above invitation. Nobody ever refuses a nomination for office unless it be the Vice-Presidency. Only six months ago I was worrying the Canadian public by seeking election to Parliament. Eighteen months pre- viously I was running for Congress in California, this being my second offence there, as I had done the same thing twelve years ago. Ten years ago, moreover, I ran for the office of xlttorney General of New York, and eight years ago I stood as a Parliamentary candidate in Manchester, England. Let him who can, challenge this record ! Of course, I always entered as a Socialist, and, needless to say, I was always successful, although never elected. We Socialists don't run for office primarily to get elected. We go into politics for the educational advantages of a Socialist campaign. The elections give us an excuse to talk, and so excite the interest of the people sufficiently that they listen much more readily to what we have to say. The mere power to act, even if never exercised, will always incline the possessor to consider a possible action, whereas if he were powerless he would be dead to our appeals. There is only one day in the year when the American people have any power, and that is Election Day. For all the use they ever make of it, of course, they might just as well never have it ; but you don't cut off a baby's legs because he doesn't use them the first month, and it would be equally silly to say that our right to vote is useless because we have not yet the sense to use it. I am simply one of the nurses teaching the American Voting Baby how to use his Voting Legs. I am trying to induce him to struggle out of the Slough of Poverty, in which he is now mired, up to the Table Land of Universal Wealth and Happiness. If we go far enough back in the development of man we will find that our ancestors had their origin in the water, for there was a time when there was no land, and, conse- quently, no land animals. When the waters receded and the land appeared, moreover, there was no wild rush of water animals to leave the water and live on dry land, just as there is none to-day, There was a steady warfare, however, among 80 Socialism Inevitable the aquatic inhabitants, some of which were at times obliged to crawl out on the land to escape those enemies that were unable to follow them, much as flying fish nowadays leave the sea for a flight in the air to escape their foes. These first chaps did not venture on the land because they liked it better; on the contrary I have no doubt that they felt quite like the typical fish out of water. But it was dry land or death, and they chose the lesser of the two evils. We are therefore land animals to-day, not because our remote ancestors deliberately decided that land was a pleas- anter abode than water, but simply because they had no other choice if they wanted to be ancestors. And man is like the rest of all living creatures he seldom moves unless he must. When the puddle dries up, the tadpole must take to the land and be a froggy or he will die in the mud, and never live to "a-wooing go." Nevertheless, all the frogs in the world might croak their lungs out in praise of land over water, without persuading one young tadpole to leave until the time comes. And while I admit that I am simply the bullfrog on the bank singing to the tadpole in the pool, yet it is just as useless to convince me of the futility of such singing, as to argue with a bull- frog as to the futility of croaking. It's a stunt that froggy and I like to do, quite irrespective of any apparent result. But perhaps neither song is as useless as it seems. Even if the tadpole will not leave the pool until its legs commence to sprout, no one can tell how much influence the frog's song may have had in hastening that sprouting. The mind controls the body of frogs as well as of men. But it may likewise be said that the body controls the mind. If you cut off a tadpole's tail he will live all right, but he never becomes a frog. His legs never develop, nor does his mind. He lives and dies a tadpole. It is the same with a man. If you cut off the opportunities for his physical development, at the same time and in almost a like degree, you cut off his pos- sibilities for intellectual development. It is therefore most important that in the education of our children, our little human tadpoles, we give them a full chance for physical development, that is, if we expect an intellectual development. And if we expect a spiritual and moral development we must have an intellectual development. 'An International Office Seeker 81 For the soul's sake we must let our legs have a chance to grow. Here in New York we send our children to schools having badly ventilated and poorly lighted rooms, and worse than all, very often without playgrounds, and we look for a crop of souls ! If I had my way I would give every school- house a whole block for a playground, and devote two-thirds of the time now almost wasted on the children's minds to the development of their bodies. A child with a good physique may have a good brain and be a useful citizen. A child with no physique will be useless even if it has a good brain. When I began this article, however, I had no idea of dis- coursing upon either evolution, psychology, mental science, education or physical culture. I simply wished to say that I felt somewhat like the bullfrog on the bank calling on the little tadpoles in the pool to come out of the slime and enjoy the air and sunshine. I know they can't come until they are ready, but I am equally aware that they must have the wish to come. I am therefore trying to inspire my fellow Ameri- cans with the wish to get out of the slime of the Marsh of Poverty. If I can show them the possibility of another and happier life, they will wish for such a life. They will also struggle for it, and vote for it. The wish is father to the deed. I know that the American Voting Tadpoles are now about ready to drop their competitive tails and put on their co- operative legs. They are physically and intellectually ready for such a change, and all that is needed is to show them that the Bank of Socialism is at hand for them to climb upon, and that the climbing is easy. Of course, as the waters evaporate under the fierce blasts of monopoly, there is coming a time, when they will be forced to come out, for if they wait too long there may be such a sudden drying up of the puddles that some of them will perish in the mud. My mission is to get them out of the pool and into the air, before it is too late. 83 Socialism Inevitable JANE ADDAMS ARTIST (December, 1902.) WHILE in Chicago last month, I had the pleasure of meeting Miss Jane Addams, and, incidentally, of seeing her creation, Hull House. I am sure that if every one felt as I do, the great artists would have little time for work, for their lives would be one long, tiresome ex- hibition of themselves rather than of their creations. For, to me, the artist is always so much greater than his work, that I never care for the latter if I can study the former. Fortunately, however, all men are not of my mind, and artists are allowed to exhibit themselves in other shapes than flesh and blood. One of the ways that Miss Addams has thus had time in which to express herself is in the bricks and mortar of Hull House, and in the society she has gathered there to carry out her program. In styling Miss Addams an artist, and a great one, too, I do not wish the unthinking to gather that she paints pictures. When one says an artist, "without explanation, this is usually what is thought to be meant; but of course it is a mistake. An artist is one who precipitates ideal forms upon mankind. He may work on a canvas with paints, a painter; he may work on his body, an actor; he may simply work upon so- ciety, an agitator. Miss Addams may be & worker in paints, she is a worker in mankind. The success of the artist depends upon the success with which he presents his ideal; and the grander the ideal and the more successfully it is presented, the greater the artist. Now the Socialist, having to mould into his scheme the material of human society, if not, indeed, of the whole universe, certainly has the grandest ideal that it is possible for a human mind to conceive. Yet he becomes an artist only when he presents this ideal in such tangible shape that the world may see beauties which have hitherto existed hidden in his mind. Addams, Jane Artist 83 I may have a picture of a horse in my mind's eye quite equal to any that Kosa Bonheur ever put upon canvas; but until I can precipitate this conception upon canvas I am not an artist. The personality of the artist is attractive on account of the reciprocity existing between the creator and the creation. An artist cannot create a work of art without enriching his own soul as much, subjectively, as he has enriched the soul of the world objectively. Hence the world cannot reward the artist, for his reward comes, not only in the joy of creation, but in the contemplation of his own soul, which he sees embodied in his work. A work of art is a mirror reflecting the artist's soul to the world in general and to himself in particular. The artist focalizes the ideals of a people. If they have inharmonious social relations their ideals are shattered, and no great works of art can be produced as would be possible in a more perfect society. I have this morning's Toronto World in my hand, and notice the following item : Athens, Oct. 27th. The beautiful broken bronze statue of Mer- cury which was found at the bottom of the sea near the Island of Anticythera, south of Cape Matapan, in the spring of 1901, has been pieced together by M. Andre, a French expert. The task has been performed with skill, and it is difficult to believe that the statue was reconstructed from numerous fragments. It is rather more than life size, and is of the finest Greek workmanship. It is considered to rival the exquisite marble Mercury of Praxiteles, which was found at Mount Olympus in 1877 and which has hitherto been deemed the most beautiful statue in the world. Apart from its singular beauty it has a peculiar value as being the only extant example of an undoubted original bronze statue of the fourth century before Christ. I wonder if it has never struck many people with wonder especially those who boast of the material progress of the Twentieth Century that when it comes to art we cannot chip out a single statue having the glory of a little pieced-together Mercury fished out of the sea, where it has lain for more than two thousand years. Here we have the marble, the tools pneumatic chisels if need be the leisure, the desire, and even the artists, but we cannot, with all our work, get results that were mere play to the Greeks. It is simply because our artists have no audience. They have no artistic society to stimulate them. When Praxiteles worked he felt the applause, the 84 Socialism Inevitable cultivated applause, of all the Greek nation, saturated to its heart with a love for beauty. To-day a few of us think we enjoy beautiful things, and more pretend to enjoy them; but most of us have never had a chance even to realize that beauty exists. The Greek society was healthy, a society in which all, except the slaves, who were ignored, had a pleasurable part to play. The differences in individual fortunes were not such that the mass of society was continually at the verge of starvation while a few had so much wealth that they did not know what to do with it. Moreover they were continually at war with other nations and had come to feel the absolute necessity of being interested in, and caring for, each other's welfare if they wished to preserve their own. For though war, in itself, is inartistic, it has been the main factor in the past in the welding together of society, which, of course, was a necessary preliminary to the era of Art. However, I am a long time in coming to my point regarding Miss Addams and her art, and certainly did not intend taking in Athens when I began to speak of Chicago. Miss Addams is trying to form the nucleus of an Art Center in Chicago, and while from a certain point of view her task is an absolutely hopeless one, considering the hostility of the environment, nevertheless there is a phase of her work that perhaps may justify it. We would hardly think of trying to make hell cooler by dropping snowballs into it, and yet if the devil, or his friends there, ever happened to be struck, he might be led to see the desirability of reducing the tempera- ture. On a hot day a man finds, possibly by accident, that waving a palm leaf makes him more comfortable. He invents the palm-leaf fan; later on he calls electricity to his aid and has the electric fan, and someday he will cool his house in summer as he now, Baer willing, heats it in winter. Man must first have the wish for a thing before he can get it ; and he will not wish for it until he has reason to know that its possession is both pleasurable and possible. The Chicago proletariat would all want the beautiful life that Miss Addams presents to them in Hull House as a pos- sibility, if they could see it. But the trouble is that there are but a few that ever do see it, and even they have no practical plan presented to them for >ttafnlng it. Addams, Jane Artist 85 This endeavor of Hull House to open up a better life to the poor is apparently largely dependent upon the re-establish- ment of primitive industries in Chicago : the making of pottery and weaving of cloth by -hand, and the sale of such goods to rich people who have a fancy for them, and can afford to pay hand labor to make an article that a machine will turn out for about one per cent, of the cost, and, in the eyes of most people, a superior article at that. Now I do not wish to create the impression that a gifted woman like Miss Addams values such a work except as it leads to the desire for those social conditions which will enable all of us to make what we please for the joy of making. My only difference with her is as to means : whether the time, money and talent she is devoting to Hull House could not be used to a greater advantage in another way to attain the same result. We simply differ as to the best means : our end is the same the Kingdom of God on Earth? * * 86 Socialism Inevitable WHY SAVE MEN'S SOULS ^_ (December, 1902.) THERE was a time when talking about saving souls was ever wearisome to me. It seemed such a useless thing to talk of saving the souls of men whose bodies gave no sign of possessing any souls worth the saving, even when granted that they had souls to save. On the other hand, I had to admit that there really existed no incentive to save men's bodies if they had no souls to make it worth while. But later, when I came to see that it was a mathematical certainty that the bodies were going to be saved, I began to consider the soul of man. The bodies, of a certainty, are going to be saved. Man's increasing control over natural forces will finally cause the earth to produce such a vast quantity of wealth, that it will finally overflow any dam that men may erect in the vain attempt to make it artificially scarce, in order that the pos- sessors of it may hold the non-possessors in subjection. A dam across a mill-stream is of value only when there is neither too little or too much water. It is just as necessary that there be a waste-way, as that there be a fall. When the stream is so full that the whole surrounding country is at flood, the power of the dam is gone. Air is just as useful to man as food, but it has no value since it may be had for the breathing. When food becomes as plentiful and as easy to obtain as air, it will be equally valueless ; but that does not mean that it will become useless. Man will still eat and breathe. However, on the day that food loses its value because all may have it in plenty, on that day men's bodies will be saved, and the earth will become peopled by a healthy, strong, and beautiful race. It will be as impossible for men to be un- healthy and ugly the words are synonymous as for a herd of wild deer in the forest to be unhealthy or ugly. Then the earth will sing with joy and beauty. Why Save Men's Souls? 87 But granting that it will thus sing, why should I be inter- ested in hastening the day of song? Not because of any hope that I, individually, shall be either a participant or a spectator. I have such hope, of course, for the day when food will be as plentiful as air is near at hand, but the real joy of striving for a Heaven on Earth consists in the striving itself, and not in the hope of realization. It is but shifting the question to say that it is natural for man to strive for the beautiful. Why is it natural to strive for beauty? Why do we love life? Why do we love music? Because life, the Soul of Things, is harmony. There is a note vibrating through the universe which causes all things to vibrate in unison with it. It makes inanimate Nature take form in harmonious lines of beauty. Not even a snowflake but joyfully obeys this rhythmic law of beauty. In response to it the butterfly paints her wings and the nightingale tunes her lute. The composer arranges his anthem, the painter his colors, the poet his words, and the true man his deeds, to come into unison with the same great song of life. The effort is with most of us unconscious to-day. When we shall become conscious of what we are doing, we shall experience the greater joy that a Mozart possesses over a nightingale, a Raphael over a butterfly. The joy of the consciousness of harmony is greater than the mere sensation of the harmony: It is the joy of the soul over the body. Anyone can enjoy a symphony, but the greatest joy comes to those who understand, to mu- sicians. There is the joy of the material and the joy of the spiritual; but the joy of the spiritual must have a material base. To have spiritual harmony we must have material harmony. I may enjoy the symphony more in my soul than in my ears, but I must have ears to support the soul's delight. I may hear the symphony but once, but I must have had ears to have heard it that once if it is to light my soul through eternity. The spirit must have the earth to root itself in; otherwise there can be no spirit. We cannot have souls with- out bodies, and we cannot have great souls if we starve the body. Life is the successive annihilation of shorter rhythmic waves by larger ones, a continuous progression to an infinitely great vibration. You have seen a storm begin at sea first come the ripples, then the short, choppy waves, and finally the 88 Socialism Inevitable grand, heaving swells which absorb all the little waves and ripples that preceded them. Humanity is still in the ripple stage, but the storm is rising, and all men are being irresist- ibly forced from their petty vibrations, with the little ripples, into the larger waves of human thought and sympathy now so rapidly forming on the ocean of life. How High Can Wages Go? 89 HOW HIGH CAN WAGES GO? (December, 1902.) A GREAT many employers conscientiously believe that wages cannot be raised if the increase will make the cost of production greater than the present receipts pf the business will allow. They seem quite oblivious to the pos- sibility of raising prices sufficiently to enable them to pay the higher wages. In the last coal strike the operators said that if they paid the wages demanded by the miners they could not get enough for the coal to enable them to meet the cost of production. However, as soon as production was curtailed the price of coal went up from $6 to $20 a ton. Here, then, was a differ- ence of $14- a ton, while the advance in cost of mining, which would have resulted from paying the increase of wages de- manded by the miners, would not have amounted to twenty cents a ton. The people simply must have coal, and if the cost of operating the mines forces up the price, then, rather than go without, they will pay whatever is necessary to get it. Of course, when such a tremendous rise takes place there is naturally a great diminution of demand, but this does not alter the fact that the operators will be able to make enough on the coal that is sold to pay the miners tremendous wages. I take the following from the Toronto World: EMPLOYER AND EMPLOYEE. But no power on earth can make an industry or a business carry a heavier wage burden than its strength will uphold. Over- loaded, it must get rid of part of the burden or it must sink. And the alternative which the wage earner must choose is to lighten the burden when it is too heavy, and not to increase it when it is as heavy as can be tolerated, or he will do the worst thing he can do for himself. He will narrow his own field of employment. He will diminish its fruits which may be divided with him. He will kill the goose that lays the golden egg. New York Press. 90 Socialism Inevitable "This editorial opinion/' says the Toronto World, "is called forth by the current trend of the labor situation in Great Britain and the United States. According to the London, Eng., Chamber of Commerce returns, there occurred in 1901 for the first time since 1895 a heavy fall in the total wages of British workmen. In 1901, the Chamber of Commerce Journal computes, there was a decrease in wages of 1,584,000 (about $7,900,000), as against an increase in 1900 of about 6,000,000. Thus far in 1902 the downward tendency has continued, so that the end of the year will doubtless show a further recession of the total wages from the highest figures of 1901. "It is found, on looking further into the Chamber of Com- merce report, that though this reduction occurred in the total wages paid out, in some groups of industries the work- men actually secured increased wages. In other words, while wages in particular groups have advanced, the general decline in wages forced the total results far down, as the statistics quoted above show. "Taking these figures as a text, The Press warns trades unions against the indiscriminate forcing up of wages in industries, some of which may not be able to stand the ad- advance in expenditure entailed. The Press then proceeds : Because there has been a great boom in one industry, with largely increased wages, not only made possible but voluntarily raised in response to the universal law of supply and demand, we have seen undiscriminating wage-earners taking it for granted that there should be a corresponding increase in wages in indus- tries and occupations which have been in fact, for one reason or another, languishing. They have attempted to enforce their demands when the temporary enforcement of them must inevit- ably cripple their employers, if not drive some of them to the wall. A case in point whose details we have given some study is that of the carting and trucking business. For the last two years this business has been staggering under burdens of exceptional disadvantage. The increased cost of horses put a heavy tax on it. The increased cost of all the materials used for building and repairing the equipment of the business the wood, the iron and steel of the wagons and the material of the harness added to the burden. Then the cost of feed, owing to the crop failures, practically doubled, so that the trucking and general delivery business was in the worst shape to make money at any time in years. And at that very time of distress at the extreme depres- sion of the business the drivers, handlers and other workmen How High Can Wages Go? 91 employed in the group decided that because others had been get- ting advances in wages they should get them. The demands were presented by the union and the choice was given to the employers of granting them or of suffering a strike. In one case which we examined the new scale presented to an employer called for an additional wage payment of $60,000 a year. The business was not making one-fourth of that sum. But the scale was generally enforced, with the result that some of thj employ- ers were compelled to cut down the number of their wagons, to injure the efficiency of their service, and to reduce the scope of their business, while others were put out of business entirely. In these days of searching for a means of bringing capital and labor into proper relations with each other, any illumi- nating comment on the problem is of interest, and we there- fore quote our contemporary on this question. The average production per laborer according to Census Bulletin 150, U. S. Reports, is $2,451 a year while the wages paid average $437. Certainly, if the laborers were completely organized they could get the whole of the $2,451 that they produce, less such sum as the capitalist might need to keep up his plant and his wages for superintendence. The Steel Trust to-day pays profits of more than one hundred millions a year, but if the times were dull they would run the works at a loss rather than shut down. If labor could hold its own in a strike, it could put up wages to the extent of absorbing the whole of the present one hundred millions profit, for it would pay Mr. Morgan to lose all his profits rather than close the works. In the case of the trucking industry in New York which The Press refers to, it can be seen upon a moment's reflection that the carriage of freight from the depot to the store is an absolute necessity to the merchant. There is no substitute that can be offered for transportation by trucks. He simply must pay what the teamsters demand or go out of business. He has been basing his business upon a certain cost of truck- age, but he must re-base it upon another cost and add the difference to the selling price of his goods. Nor need he fear his competitors, for the same extra cost will force them to adopt the same means of preservation. If the extra cost of trucking would ruin business in New York, then the excessive rents paid there to the land owners should certainly have ruined business long ago. But we all know that business 92 Socialism Inevitable increases every year in New York, and every year up go rents. The merchants simply recoup themselves by charging higher prices. If, on the other hand, people could not afford to pay the prices, they would move away and down would tumble rents. The American Ideal 93 THE AMERICAN IDEAL (February, 1903.) ONE often hears the cynical remark that we Americans have lost our ideals. As a matter of fact, it is abso- lutely impossible for a man to lose his ideals, although conditions may be such that, unless he sees, or thinks he sees, the possibility of realizing them, he endeavors to banish them from his mind. We Americans are to-day largely of the opinion that our old ideal of freedom for the citizen seems to have become an impossibility. There was a time when we thought that individual energy and talent were all that was necessary to insure one's independence and success, in life. On the other hand, we always realized that economic in- dependence presupposed the possession of wealth; and now, inasmuch as a great part of the wealth of this country has passed into the hands of the trusts, its individual acquisition has become wellnigh impossible to the great mass of the people. We have furthermore given up hope of any distribu- tion on the part of the trusts through the enforcement of anti-Trust laws; and but few of us yet see that this distribu- tion can be effected by State Ownership. Judge Grosscup, who recently made a very learned speech upon the subject of the Trust, says that the first step toward their regulation should be the repeal of the Sherman Anti- Trust Law. Of course he is right ; but since he does not pro- pose any other law to take its place, it is really a confession of a most pessimistic attitude on the part of a man who should be thoroughly competent to judge of the situation. Hit. logic, however, is keener and clearer than that of President Roosevelt, who proposes all sorts of remedies, each more manifestly impossible than its predecessor. Judge Grosscup, in short, realizes the futility of things as they are ; and I take it that the great mass of the American people are in agreement with him on this point, having lost confidence in Roosevelt 94 Socialism Inevitable and his political confreres who talk about proceeding against the trusts on the old lines. But while we have largely resigned ourselves to Grosscup's position that nothing can be done, as things are at present, we do feel that the future has something else in store. This feeling, indeed, is inborn. We cannot get rid of the idea that America means something more than a mere pleasure ground for a few Goulds and Vanderbilts and their retainers. Dimly, unconsciously perhaps, we believe in a glorious destiny for the nation. I appeal, therefore, to the young men of America to come forward and help toward the realization of the American ideal of freedom. It is really you who should bear the brunt of assisting in making the change from the present autocratic industrial condition to a democratic one. You realize that the country is rich enough to make the very suggestion of the necessity of poverty a ghastly mockery. If your grand- fathers could look to a future of happiness and freedom and wealth, when they had no dream of the labor-saving machinery of to-day, then certainly it is not flattering to your intelligence if you think that poverty is necessary when we have at hand such abundant means to prevent it. But what is the young man doing to-day to realize the ideal which must be within his breast? Practically nothing. Instead of paying attention to political and industrial de- velopments, he is more apt to be speculating on the result of a football game or a horse race. Instead of having pity for the poor of the country who are suffering from unnecessary poverty, he is wasting his life in pool and billiard rooms, smoking cigarettes. He goes to school and college, it is true, but his main idea is not to acquire culture or learning, but to get sufficient credit marks to graduate him with the least possible work, that he may have the greatest possible amount of time to devote to dissipation. This is certainly no flattering picture, and may have a very depressing effect upon those people who, as they view the country, see little indication of a change in the sentiment and conduct of our young men. Nevertheless, I can see that this mode of life, while most deplorable, has not succeeded in utterly destroying his ideals. The trouble is simply that the conditions which may look to their realization seem so im- The American Ideal 95 possible to him that he is now dissipating energies which would, under other conditions, be turned into better and nobler channels. It is not that the young American does not wish to control his own country and his own destiny, but that he does not see how to do it. It is the mission of the Socialist not only to inspire these young men with the ideal of commanding their own destiny, but also to show them how this command can be attained. The "reform" school of politics, some twenty-five years ago, attempted to appeal to our young men by holding up to them the ideal of honesty in office. This movement has failed of its purpose, and in consequence a great many of the men of the Carl Schurz type, and those whose views are represented by the editorials of the New York "Evening Post," are be- coming exceedingly pessimistic. After all, this is but natural. The average young man of to-day has no property. He knows that if he goes into politics he will lose caste with his business associates, the general theory throughout the country being and it is a well-founded one that "politics ruin a man." This, of course, refers to the old parties; for no one thinks of connecting himself with one of them except with the idea of getting an office or bettering his individual con- dition. Going into "reform" politics on the other hand, has no attractions, because it only means the election to office of certain men who pretend to be more honest than "the old party" men, whereas, if elected, experience goes to show that they do not make good. And moreover, even if they did, the ben- efit accruing from an honest administration falls largely to the few who own property, rather than to the great mass of the people. Thus it is easy enough to see why neither "old party" politics nor "reform" politics attracts the young man. Social- ist politics would attract him if he were to give it sufficient thought to know what Socialism means, but he doesn't. He regards the Socialist as a crank with some wild visions of an impossible Utopia that is to be reached some time after the next thousand years. He does not understand that the Trust is the greatest argument the Socialist uses to prove the in- evitability of Socialism ; and the chances are that he will not realize the force of this argument until the Trust itself finally throws him out of his job. 96 Socialism Inevitable All mankind has an ideal of a paradise on earth; and if we analyze our idea of that paradise it resolves itself into a condition of existence where everyone is on an economic equal- ity, where there is no danger of starvation, where there is not too much work, and where everybody is happy. Now, in order to banish fear of starvation it is necessary to have the earth on which to raise the food, and to raise the food with ease it is necessary to have machinery. We Americans certainly have provided the earth with machinery in a larger degree than has ever been done before. We know how to produce the greatest quantity of wealth with the least amount of human labor that has ever been required in the world's history. We have made the first great step toward our earthly paradise. The only thing that remains for us to do is to devise a plan by which we can distribute the wealth which we so easily pro- duce. When we achieve that end, we shall realize the American Ideal. Our work is to make the young American see that his ideal can be reached only through the advent of Socialism. Classes In America 97 CLASSES IN AMERICA (March, 1903.) WE Americans have a great advantage over other nations in our unconsciousness of classes. That we have rich and poor is not to be gainsaid; but that we have classes and class feeling, is almost as vigorously denied by the poor as by the rich. And this denial of the obvious has an effect upon the social consciousness that it is hard to over-estimate. In Europe classes are a recognized institution. The peasant never thinks that he is anything but a peasant, nor does the nobleman ever think he is anything but a nobleman. Even the very rich capitalist feels that he is hardly as good as the poor aristocrat. In America, while differences in wealth have really made very distinct class lines, we refuse to recognize this con- dition; and there is no doubt that this refusal will sooner or later have a considerable political effect. We deny, in fact, that Mr. Eockefeller's money was ever given to him except for the benefit of the whole people, and insist that the wealth of such men will be distributed in due course of time by natural laws, and that the sons of other men will be quite as likely to own Eockef eller's wealth as his own descendants. This, indeed, is the stock argument of almost all opponents of Socialism. They insist that while there is great wealth in a few hands, this is simply an ephemeral condition of affairs, and that no one family will hold the bulk of its wealth any length of time. Now so long as people generally believe this, it is not difficult to understand why they refuse to consider any change of society which would aim at preventing the concentration of wealth, feeling, as they do, that things will regulate them- selves automatically. But we are now beginning to realize that this concentration of wealth, and the holding of the natural resources of the country by a few immensely rich 98 Socialism Inevitable families, instead of an ephemeral state of affairs, has every indication of being a permanency. Every year the very rich are becoming more and more strongly intrenched behind their ramparts of gold, and the public are generally recognizing that under our existing social system there is no possible remedy for the inequality of wealth. It is true there have been anti-Trust bills galore introduced in Congress, having for their object the levelling of the great fortunes ; but these bills are felt by everyone to be of no pos- sible avail in that direction. Concentration of wealth is an inevitable result of our economic system, and we can no more make effective laws to prevent it than we can make laws to prevent the sun shining. However, the introduction of these anti-Trust bills, year after year, in Congress, indicates strongly the wish of the people to level wealth and to abolish conditions which make classes. They are also a very reluctant confession that there is such a thing as a class cleavage in the United States. Our sentiments, in short, are too strongly democratic to allow any classes to remain if we can possibly prevent it, and to this extent Socialism, which aims to abolish classes, will have a spiritual significance to the people of America which it has not in European countries where aristocracy is a recognized institution. Now there has never been a nation of free people, such as we Americans are, who have resolved year after year that they wished to do a certain thing, and with every reason to gain that wish, and also every means for carding it into effect, have not finally succeeded in their desires. While we scoff at the anti-Trust laws, we can nevertheless see behind them the determination of the people to accomplish the es- tablishment of an economic equality in this country. It was the same before our separation from England when there was a long period in which we kept on passing resolutions against her oppression, and even having physical encounters with her. Yet it was with the greatest reluctance we ever finally considered the possibility of separation from the mother country ; in fact, it was once considered rank treason to refer to independence as an ultimate outcome of the agitation against England's tyranny. We expected to make some sort of a compromise by which we would still remain colonies, and Classes In America 99 yet participate in all the advantages of an independent nation. It is the same to-day : we allow the Kockefellers and Morgans to own ns, and yet we expect to have all the luxuries of com- plete independence which can only accompany self-ownership. Of course it will finally be found to be just as impossible for us to remain free and independent under King Morgan as it was more than a century ago under King George. Theoretic- ally, in fact, as has been proved by the English colonies Canada and Australia, New Zealand, etc. the latter would have been much more feasible, for King George did not need to have been a benevolent despot to have kept the American colonies ; he needed but to have been sane. King Morgan, with all his benevolence, can never keep his American colonies, simply because the economic system will prevent him from devising a plan which can avert a great unemployed problem. Under King George the economic problem was how we could produce enough to give us the comforts and luxuries of life. Under King Morgan the problem is, how can we prevent our- selves producing too much? Our fear is that we will be swamped in a rising tide of wealth. What we must do then is not to try and prevent the sea of wealth from rising, but to construct the bark of Socialism which will float us safely upon it, so that instead of being menaced by the rising tide we will be borne forward upon it to the Golden Age of Man. 100 Socialism Inevitable THE MYSTERIOUS MR. HEARST (April, 1903.) MK. HEAEST is more or less a mystery to certain advanced thinkers. They see him publishing a great paper of enormous circulation, having a policy which is, on the whole, very Socialistic, and whose editorials are the strongest to be found in any American daily. And yet they are always prepared for the most glaring inconsistency on his part at any moment. For instance, one day they find him showing how absolutely impossible it is to do anything in the way of destroying the Trust, since it represents the natural evolution of in- dustry, yet the very next day he comes out with an editorial calling for the destruction of so-called criminal trusts, where- as by his own analysis he has proved that the Trust cannot be criminal, because it is simply a result of natural law. Again, he will show the impossibility of obtaining justice under the existing competitive system, where the machinery of production is owned by a few great monopolists, and then he follows with an editorial to the effect that all one has to do to get along, is to attend strictly to the employment in which God has seen fit to place him in this world. Later on, he will have an editorial showing that all poverty is traceable not to the monopoly of the earth by the Vanderbilts and the Rocke- fellers, but to the drinking of whiskey by the workingmen; whereupon, to cap the climax, as if more were needed to con- fuse the people as to his sincerity, he keeps insisting in a delicate manner, by quoting from other papers, upon the great desirability of electing Mr. Hearst President of the United States. It seems to me that from his own standpoint, or what- ever way we may look at it, this last stroke is the worst possible policy. I can conceive how, in order to keep all classes of readers and hold his advertisers, he must give all sorts of views as to The Mysterious IdR. Keaiist 101 what should be done, and advocate temperance, the destruc- tion of trusts, national ownership of trusts, tariff reform, and everything else which will bring fish into his net; but when he utilizes his paper to boom himself for the Presidency, he immediately makes a large number of people feel that, after all, he does not mean anything he says, but simply has his say in order to place himself in the Presidential chair. My own theory regarding Mr. Hearst is a very simple one. He is following an irresistible law of his nature to bring about harmony in the universe ; but he is ignorant as to how to do it. He is also following an irresistible law which forces him to take care of his own individuality ; and the result of his ignorance of economic laws on the one hand, together with his extreme egotism on the other, is that many people entirely misunderstand him. 102 Socialism Inevitable A TALK WITH ROCKEFELLER (May, 1903.) LAST March, while on my way from Los Angeles to San Francisco, I had occasion to stop over for a few days at Santa Barbara, one of the most famous of the California resorts. Except for the want of angels, Santa Barbara is about as near to being an earthly Paradise as one can imagine. It lies directly on the Pacific Ocean at the opening of a beautiful little valley, at the head of which, under the mountains, is the old Franciscan monastery, built by the monks a hundred and fifty years or more ago, when California was under the dominion of Spaim The Church of Kome at that time had a grand plan in hand to convert the Indians to Catholicism by the establish- ment of a chain of semi-Socialistic communities extending from San Francisco all the way down to the lower end of the Peninsula of California. With the ceding of California to the United States, however, the monasteries had a hard time to survive, for the property they had owned was largely lost, and the Indians., who had been faithful workers in their fields and vineyards, were dispersed. Probably at no time before, and certainly at no time since, have the California Indians had either the material or the spiritual advantages that they enjoyed under the kindly rule of the old Mission padres. At that time the missions were surrounded by great stretches of pasture land, upon which grazed numerous herds of sheep, cattle and horses, all the property of the padres, but used for the benefit of the whole community. The monks furthermore introduced a good system of irrigation, and the fig, the vine, the olive and the orange were cultivated with great success. Then the greater the production, the more the monks and Indians received. There was no fear of starvation on account of "over-production" in those silly, primitive days. They produced for use and not for profit. A Talk With Rockefeller 103 I can imagine how astounded one of the old padres would have been if told that he would be forced to go without olive oil some day if too many olive trees came into bear- ing, because the price of olive oil would fall below the cost of production. Such reasoning would have been absolutely incomprehensible to him, and had I been there to inform him that the Mission must go hungry simply because there were too many fat cattle, I would, no doubt, have been regarded as a fit subject for the "rest cure." In those careless times, however, they had no "rest cures/' for, paradoxically, everyone had to do enough work not to require a rest. The people who most need relaxation are those that do not have to work. I don't say they do not actually work hard, but simply that they do not "have to" work at all. There is a fine distinction: Mr. Schwab never broke down until he worked because he "wanted to." But we are in the days when people do need a "rest cure," and Mr. John D. Rockefeller, being no exception to the rule, showed his usual good judgment in selecting Santa Barbara. The Hotel Potter directly faces the sea. It is a fine, modern hostelry opened this season for the first time, and Mr. Rockefeller was by no means the only multi-millionaire enjoying its perfect climate. Indeed the local Santa Bar- bara paper proudly printed a list of our American nobility there, gauging the relative value of titles by the size of the bank rolls. The total footed up to something near a thou- sand million dollars, which can be readily believed when I say that the guests included Mrs. Pierpont Morgan, Mr. Marshall Field, Mr. Armour^ Mr. Seward Webb, and other scarcely less notable multi-millionaires. Robert T. Lincoln, the son of President Lincoln, was also there, scheduled at ten million, but of all the lot, Mr. Rockefeller, being the richest, was the noblest, and, naturally, the centre of attrac- tion to all Santa Barbara, and especially myself. Mr. Rockefeller is by no means the physical wreck that the press likes to picture him. I sat at the next table to him and can vouch for the strength and scope of his appe- tite. His color is good, and he looks a fairly healthy man for his age, sixty-four, with the exception that he has lost every spear of hair from his head and face. He was most affable and approachable, and seemed to make a point of 104 Socialism Inevitable going the rounds every day with a glad hand extended to all. His interest in life, however, seemed to be centered on the game of golf. Knowing that his nervous system is so impaired that he does not wish to burden his mind with anything very strenu- ous, I really felt conscience-stricken in ever departing from the subject of the weather and golf in my talks with him. However, one day I did bring up the subject of the Trust. He listened with interest to my exposition of the Socialist philosophy regarding monopoly, and said, "Well, Mr. Wil- shire, I can't speak as to other trusts, but certainly, so far as the Standard is concerned, the over-production of oil led to its formation. We were producing three times as much oil as could be sold and the trade was in a very bad way. The Trust resulted in the greatest benefit to the refiners, while the general public were also benefitted by getting lower prices." Mr. Eockefeller then inquired if I had read the articles by Miss Tarbell upon the Standard Oil Trust now running in McClure's Magazine. "All without foundation," he said ; "the idea of the Standard forcing anyone to sell his refinery to it is absurd. The refiners wanted to sell out to us, and there is nobody who sold out and worked with us but has made money and is glad he did so. "Now, you, Mr. Wilshire, are personally acquainted with so and so (mentioning men, our mutual friends, interested in Standard Oil), and you know that such honorable men would not do anything maliciously to injure anyone. You know, furthermore, that they all did well by coming into the Trust. I can tell you that everyone who came in with us has done well. It's absurd to say that the Standard forced the refiners into the Trust. They were only too glad to come in, and they have all made money. Natural conditions would have ruined us all if we had not formed a combination. "I thought once of having an answer made to the McClure articles," continued Mr. Eockefeller, "but you know it has always been the policy of the Standard to keep silent under attack and let our acts speak for us. I suppose it is the best policy for us to continue upon that line, don't you, Mr. Wilshire?" I was quite overcome with confusion at having the richest A Talk With Eockefeller 105 man in the world seek the advice of a Socialist upon a ques- tion of personal conduct. "Don't you think, Mr. Eockefeller," I asked presently, "that since the Trust is, according to your own theory, a result of overproduction, it means that we are approaching a time when the general stoppage of this unnecessary production hy the trusts will have the tendency to create an unemployed prob- lem?" "No," said Mr. Eockefeller, "I think the Trust, by regu- lating industry and systematizing business, will help keep up this present prosperity. We have never had such a period in the history of the country before, and yet never were there so many trusts; hence it cannot be said that trusts prevent prosperity. There are less unemployed men than ever before known in the history of the country. And, anyway, since we are both agreed that an anti-trust law is absurd, since it is attempting to prevent the consequences of over-production, how would you propose to solve the Trust Problem?" "Yes, Mr. Eockefeller, I am as much aware of the futility of anti-trust laws as you are. The Socialist remedy for the trusts is Government Ownership." "Do you thing the Government could run the Standard as well as we run it?" asked Mr. Eockefeller. "I would not be positive that the State could run the trusts any better than you and Mr. Morgan do, speaking from the standpoint of industrial efficiency; but Government Ownership is a necessary basis for the establishment of the co-operative wage system, which must supersede the present competitive system, if only to allow us to escape an unem- ployed problem, which is simply the result of competition among laborers, forcing wages down so low that the laborer cannot buy what he produces." "But we have no 'unemployed problem/ We never had such a demand for labor as to-day," returned Mr. Eocke- feller. "Yes, that is true," I replied, "but I am looking into the future and can see an inevitable unemployed problem loom- ing up there. The Trust is meeting a present emergency, but it is at best only a temporary stop-gap, and is not in the least fitted to solve the unemployed problem of the future." "Well, Mr. Wilshire, I am not looking ahead as far as 106 Socialism Inevitable you are. Business to-day is good, and I think it will con- tinue so. If it does not, then we must let the future settle its own problems." "Well, anyway, Mr. Kockefeller, I am very glad to have had the opportunity of talking with you, for I feel that when the industrial crisis does come, it will help very much for us to understand each other's position. There is nothing better than having men like you and me, who, after all, do have a common interest, coming into personal contact with each other. While our views are different, yet our having met will lead us to respect the sincerity of our mutual opinions and personal good faith." "You are quite right, Mr. Wilshire," said Mr. Rockefeller, "and I am very glad to have had the pleasure of this talk with you." This closed the interview upon the Trust Problem, for, although I talked with Mr. Rockefeller a number of times afterward, it was nothing but "golf and weather." I am satisfied from this talk that Mr. Rockefeller is true to himself. He thinks he is right. He believes that his business methods have not only been the best for himself and his fellow stockholders, but also for the public generally. Mr. Rockefeller is in no sense a man of theories. He sees a present necessity, and acts upon it without considering what will be the next step. He is democratic and without envy in his manner and instincts, and I am sure he would like to have all his brother Americans possess as much money as he has. Ostentation is an unknown word to him. His is the instinct of the coral insect that thinks of nothing more than the next infinitesimal layer it places upon the coral reef that is to found a future continent. Mr. Rockefeller is the power behind Mr. Morgan's throne, and remains in the shadow, not because he objects to the world-glare in which Mr. Mor- gan basks, but simply because pomp and glory are matters of indifference to him. Some newly rich men envy the foot- men on the box of their carriage, owing to their conspicuous position and their gaudy livery. Mr. Rockefeller is not of that sort. He rides in his carriage, not to exhibit himself and his wealth, but to "get there," and he does "get there," too. I do not think this is at all an unnatural view for me to A Talk With Rockefeller 107 take of Mr. Rockefeller's philosophy of life. It is the phil- osophy held by all normal men, and I think Mr. Rockefeller perfectly normal except for his having an unusual ability in the art of making money. We live to live, not to let other peo- ple know we are alive. I wear clothes, not for ornament, but for warmth, just as I attend the opera, not to exhibit myself to other people, but to satisfy my ears and eyes. The squirrel does not lay up his winter store of nuts in order to make other squirrels envious of him, nor yet to have them admire his wealth and foresight. He does it for the one and single purpose of feeding himself when the snow covers the ground, and when, if he had no store on hand, he would starve. The bees do the same; and, even in California, where there are flowers all the year round, follow up their old instinct, de- veloped under different climatic conditions, of gathering honey for a winter that never comes, and consequently lay- ing up immense stores of honey that are never consumed at all and simply goes to waste, unless man, wandering in the forest, happens accidentally to find the bee tree. Mr. Rockefeller is like the California bee. He is obeying a fundamental instinct to accumulate, although the original incentive for laying up more wealth has long since ceased. It thus becomes as much a part of his life to go on accumu- lating surplus wealth as it is for the California bee to accu- mulate surplus honey, and you no more could reason Mr. Rockefeller out of his irresistible instinct than you could successfully reason with the bee. For even suppose you could teach a bee the futility of gathering honey which would never be eaten, what a miserable little bee you would make. How could the poor thing pass away the time if she could not gather honey? Would you teach her to play golf? Would you teach her to gamble with her sister bees, to see which should have the most of the useless honey that no bee wanted anyway, because there was already too much on hand ? No, if you had a kind heart you would let the poor bee go on gathering honey for the rest of her life, even though you knew she were making something that would be of no use. For to be happy she must be a busy bee. Her problem in life is not to own honey, but to make honey. I don't know that Browning was thinking of either busy bees or busy Rockefellers when he wrote : 108 Socialism Inevitable The common problem, yours, mine, every one's, Is not to fancy what were fair in life Provided it could be but, finding first What may be, then, how to make it fair Up to our means; a very different thing! But his philosophy was all right, just the same. Now, you can't introduce any game to a bee that will allow her to be lazy, and yet imagine herself a busy bee. You can't make her drunk, for instance, and make her think she is doing great stunts in the honey-making line, while as a matter of fact she is fast asleep in the club window of the hive. Neither can you get her to chase around the golf links of a honeyless garden pretending to gather honey, but in reality simply playing a make-believe game of life. But with Mr. Eockefeller it is quite different. He has a man's imagination, and so you can fool him. On nice, clear days you can set him to playing golf, whereupon he will forget all about the sterner game of life and enjoy the imitation more than he ever enjoyed the real. At least, he thinks he does, which is the same thing. Then, on rainy days, you can let him stay in the club, and by sundry and judicious Scotch high-balls fool him into thinking he is doing things when in reality he is not even walking around the golf links. Verily, it's a great thing to be a man rather than a bee. But there is another difference, too. The bee gathers her honey in a fair field, one that is freely open to all bees, whereas Mr. Eockefeller gathers his honey from a private preserve. Here we have a great United States Flower Garden and plenty of honey for all. But, years ago, our grandfathers made a very silly arrangement with certain people whereby Mr. Eockefeller now owns the greater part of the garden. We gather the honey for him, and he gives us just enough to keep us sufficiently alive that we may fly around and gather more. I say this was a silly arrangement, for there was no reason why we should not, in our own country, our own United States, our own flower garden, have all the honey we gather for ourselves, instead of giving up three-quarters to capitalists like Mr. Eockefeller and Mr. Morgan. However, our grandfathers made the agreement and we seem to think that we not only cannot back out of it, but must, in turn, pledge our own grandchildren to continue the arrangement. A Talk With Rockefeller 109 The trouble that is now vexing our souls, however, is a very serious one. We thought our contract carried with it the implication that as long as we were willing to gather honey from the National Garden for Mr. Rockefeller and Mr. Morgan, they would be willing to admit us to the field to gather it and get our quarter share. It appears we made a mistake. Mr. Rockefeller now says that he has all the honey he wants, and that there is no use of our gathering what he doesn't require. He has formed his Trust for the express purpose of fencing us out of the Garden of Earth, and we cannot deny that he has much more honey than he can use, because his big Standard Hive is the most conspicuous thing in the field. Now, we cannot deny that our labor has become useless to him, for he has all he wants ; but, on the other hand, we also cannot see how we are going to get any honey for ourselves when the big Trust screen is completed and we are denied access to the Flower Garden. We are very reluctantly being forced to see that we must own the Earth ourselves if we expect to have the right at any and all times of entering the Garden to supply ourselves with the needful honey. When the Nation owns the Trust Hive, all of us American busy bees will have the right to enter and make honey and partake of the common store gathered by all. So if we wish to have what is really ours, let us get busy. Let the Nation own the Honey Trust. 110 Socialism Inevitable THE "MERGER" DICISION (May, 1903.) THE decision of the United States Court against the validity of the Northern Securities Company is, as has well been said, a most revolutionary departure in legal matters. In fact it is so very revolutionary that it is plainly unconstitutional, and I have no doubt that the Su- preme Court, on appeal, will so declare it. The very essence of the right of private property is the right of disposal, and if a law preventing disposal of property is declared consti- tutional, then the constitution must part with its time- honored label of "protector of private property." The decision is in effect that certain private persons, to wit, Mr. Hill, Mr. Morgan and others, have not the right to dispose of their stock in the Great Northern Eailway, the Burlington Eailway and the Northern Pacific Eailway to the Northern Securities Company, because that company by hold- ing the stocks in these various roads, effects a combination of competitive railways, and hence deprives the public of the currently supposed benefits of competitive railway rates. It seems to me that there could hardly be conceived a more absurd law than one which says to a man, "You must not sell your horse to anyone who already owns a horse, and if you do, we will make the purchaser hunt you up, return you your horse and take his money back. If you happen to have spent the money meanwhile, he must keep the horse until you get some more money." Now, by substituting horse for railway, that is, the old for the modern method of trans- portation, we have the command that the Circuit Court has issued to railway owners. Of course the decision will only embarrass Mr. Morgan until he gets a reversal from the Su- preme Court, but to think that it will permanently prevent Mergers is purely childish. For the time being Mr. Morgan may be held up in his great work of unifying and systematizing the railway systems on this continent; but to think that a process in the natural The "Merger" Decision 111 development of industry can be permanently prevented, is manifestly absurd. Even in the unexpected event of the United States Supreme Court affirming the decision of the Circuit Court, the general result must finally be the same, viz., that the process of concentration and consolidation will proceed, although with a possible halt, until Mr. Morgan can find a way around the obstacle. When a huge boulder rolls down the mountain side into a stream it may block the down- ward course of the water until a new channel is cut out, and the Merger decision may in the same way delay Mr. Morgan until he can cut out a new channel for the rising flood of com- bination. To think that the water blocked by the boulder will not be able to find a new channel is no sillier than to imagine that Mr. Morgan, and the forces he stands for, will not find a similar outlet. Necessity makes new laws. The president of the Seaboard Air Line, one of the south- ern railways that Mr. Morgan is preparing to merge in his Southern Securities Company as soon as he sees the legal coast clear, has expressed great satisfaction at this Merger decision. Quite naturally, too, since he is one of the useless presidents that Mr. Morgan will eliminate when he effects his southern combination. In like manner, no doubt, the little retail dry goods merchants who are being displaced by the big department stores, would like a Merger decision that would guarantee them their positions. I am aware that the Sea- board president, a Southern Colonel, sah, would be deadly insulted if he knew I classed him with a miserable village merchant, but I have also little doubt that a few years ago he would have thought it impossible that he, a great capitalist, should ever use such revolutionary language, as the following, which the Press ascribes to him: It is idle to talk of a political republic with a financial tyranny; there is no more safety in having commerce at the mercy of an absolute ruler than there would be in having our govern- ment controlled by a czar who might be a benevolent or cruel one, according to his whim or ability, or to the circumstances. It's amusing that he seems to think that the United States is not already under an industrial tyranny simply because he happens to belong to the tyrants himself. Let Mr. Morgan absorb the Seaboard Air Lane and throw him out and then the shoe is on the other foot and the Colonel roars "TY- KANNY!" 112 Socialism Inevitable HOP LEE AND THE PELICAN (May, 1903.) HOP LEE was an intelligent young Chinaman, born of poor but honest parents, upon the banks of the Yellow River. From early childhood he had been accustomed to assist in getting a living for himself and the other members of his family by fishing with the ordinary rod and line, but although this primitive method of gaining a livelihood had been followed by his forefathers for many centuries, it remained for Hop Lee so to improve upon it that he could live sumptuously without working ; and this tale is to show how successfully he carried out his plan. It was not so much through a brilliant burst of genius as by the spur of necessity that Hoppy made his great discovery. As he sat on the bank with his empty basket beside him, and fished in vain, day after day, he watched with deep chagrin a gay flock of pelicans that came down upon the waters in which he, alas, fished so fruitlessly, and filled themselves to repletion. And not only was he envious of the success of the pelicans, but he realized that their noise and splashing drove many fish away from his hook which might otherwise have been caught. Poor Hoppy pondered long upon this distressing situation and moodily watched the pelicans as they dived to the bottom of the river, waving their web-feet in the air, and triumph- antly brought up fish after fish which they stored away in their pouches, to be devoured at leisure or fed to their young. Finally, however, a brilliant idea occurred to him whereby he would not only prevent the birds from driving his fish away, but would actually compel them to deliver what they caught to him, and so fill up his empty basket. But how was he to put his ingenious plan in operation? Flattery, he decided, would be the key to success. Just how he managed it I don't pretend to know, but some way or other he learned the pelican language, which Hop Lee and the Pelican 113 was the first step toward his goal. Next he procured a pol- ished ring of brass, and, betaking himself bright and early one morning to his post on the river bank, he blandly ad- dressed the pelicans as they glided by, till finally one of them stopped for a little chat. Hoppy at once seized his opportu- nity, and with soft, insidious words beguiled the foolish bird to the bank, whereupon he proceeded to tell it how much its wonderful pelicanic beauty would be enhanced by a lovely necklace such as the one he held in his hand. Would it not allow him the pleasure of placing the necklace around its grace- ful neck ? The pelican, highly flattered, consented to be deco- rated, and fairly beamed with delight when it felt the pres- sure of the encircling metal. To Hoppy, however, the ring was strictly an object of util- ity. As soon as it was around the pelican's neck, the unlucky bird found itself unable to swallow the fish it caught; and, after almost choking to death several times, appealed, in desperation, to Hoppy to save its life. Hoppy, who was at hand upon the bank eagerly awaiting developments, was only too glad to spring to its assistance, and, by removing the fish from its throat, prevented its untimely demise. The pelican's gratitude and joy were unbounded. It felt its palpitating heart sink back from its throat into its breast ; but it also saw the fish pass out of its throat into Hoppy' s basket. Its distressed throat, in fact, was relieved of a heart and a fish at the same time. Hoppy then proceeded in a friendly tone to counsel the pelican. "You can easily see," he said, "that you cannot con- tinue to wear that ornamental ring about your neck and at the same time swallow so large a fish as you used to. Of course I know you do not wish to part with such a thing of beauty merely for the sake of having your stomach filled. Now that you have seen how beautiful it has made you, I am sure that you will feel there is no way of living without it. One gets used to luxuries so quickly that they become necessities. So, in future, when you catch a fish you must always come to me to be relieved, and I will be ready and only too glad to help you. Of course, I will see that you shall be fed. I will take the fish to my chopping block, and cut off as large a piece as you can politely swallow. In this way your life will be saved, and you will be fed with morsels of 114 Socialism Inevitable food of a size suitable to your new and improved condition. At the same time I, too, will be fed by taking the fish that you are now unable to swallow, as a small return for the assistance I shall lend you." Hop Lee had made a grand discovery how to live without working and at the same time had convinced the pelican that it was only through the exercise of his great brain power and generosity that it was able to escape being choked to death when it tried to eat the fish it caught. He, of course, waxed fat on such an arrangement. After the first pelican had shown itself, all the others were anxious to get rings about their necks to be in the fashion, and very soon Hoppy had all the pelicans on the river busily and cheerfully engaged in catching fish for him. And so, even to this day, Hop Lee and all his descendants enjoy the prospect of living indefinitely on the banks of the Yellow Eiver in ease and plenty. Now it happened that after he had acquired great wealth, Hoppy made a tour of the world, and was so fortunate, whije in America, as to be introduced to Mr. Pierpont Morgan. It is related on good authority that he was highly amused at the striking resemblance between that gentleman's ideas and his own, for he saw immediately that the American working- man has put a ring about his throat which forces him to give up the fish he catches to Mr. Morgan, and to be satisfied himself with a tail diet. "The ring is a little less tangible, to be sure, than that about the necks of our pelicans/' thought Hoppy, "but it amounts to the same thing/' It certainly does. The competitive wage-system forces the laborer to take a wage that will just give him a living. He cannot ask for more, because there are plenty of men waiting for the chance to work upon the basis of the fish-tail diet. And so long as pelicans, or workingmen, are satisfied with fish-tails there is no use giving them more. Hence the American workingman produces his $2,400 a year and gives up all but the $400 fish-tail to Mr. Morgan, just as the pelican catches 2,400 pounds of good fish and gets only 400 pounds of fish-tails in return; yet both get down on their knees and thank God that such men as Hop Lee and Morgan live to prevent pelicans and workingmen from starving to death. Hoppy congratulated himself, however, on being in a much Hop Lee and the Pelican 115 safer position than Mr. Morgan, for if his pelicans should ever get over their feeling of gratitude and pride in their rings they could not get them off, even if they wished; whereas Mr. Morgan's pelican workingmen always have the opportunity of removing the competitive rings from their necks. The American pelicans, in short, have merely to "wish the ring off/' and off it goes. The way for them to express this wish is to vote for Social- ism, as a great many American pelicans did at the last election. Unfortunately, however, there were still more who wished to continue wearing it, so that Mr. Morgan still gets the fish, and Uncle Sam the tail, 116 Socialism Inevitable COFFEE, CURRANTS AND ORANGES (August, 1903.) AS a very tangible evidence of the inability of society to distribute the wealth that is produced under our pres- ent competitive system, it is interesting to note the overproduction of three great staple products, viz., coffee in Brazil, currants in Greece, and oranges in California. Ordinary agricultural products, such as wheat or corn, which are planted from year to year, can be restricted in production, when the price falls too low, by the simple process of refraining from planting. But with a crop like oranges, growing on trees which require great expense in the planting, and culture for years before maturity, it is self-evident that one or two years of low prices will not force the growers to lose all the money invested by abandoning their orchards. For an or- chard, it is to be remembered, if neglected, goes to ruin. And the same applies to the coffee plantations and currant vine- yards. Hence when overproduction ensues in crops of this nature the planter is face to face with a very serious prob- lem. He must go to the expense of taking care of his orchard or vineyard, and he has a crop forced on his hands which he cannot dispose of. From the following item, taken from the New York Com~ mercial, of recent date, it will be seen the conditions in Brazil are so desperate that the Government is proposing to destroy one-fifth of the crop : The forty-fifth annual report of the Chamber of Commerce for the official year 1902-3 was made public yesterday. The proceed- ings of the Chamber for the year ending April 30, 1903, together with the roll of members, officers and committees, constitution and by-laws, comprise the first part of the volume. The second part contains trade reviews and statistical statements of trade and finance. The report says: "The coffee markets of the world have been overshadowed by the enormous yield of the Brazilian crop, which has been of increasing rather than of diminishing proportions, Coffee, Currants and Oranges 117 and has afforded very little opportunity for the development of bullish features. The crop of 1901-1902 was more than the whole world's yearly consumption, and this was followed by a crop that very nearly equaled it in size, while the present prospect is that the crop due July 1 will exceed all its predecessors, the estimates foreshadowing a production of 16,000,000 bags. "This enormous expansion is the result of the plan of agricul- tural development adopted several years ago, and which resulted in converting a large acreage of wild land into coffee plantations. The new trees, which require three years to mature, have grad- ually swelled the proportions of the crop, until now planters are just as anxious to restrict the yield, and various plans have been discussed, but the only one that has in any way materialized is the tax in kind levied in the State of San Paulo, which is to go in operation July 1; under the provisions of this law planters will he required to hand over to the Government 20 per cent, of their shipments. "Thus, if an order for 1,000 bags is received, the planter will be required to send to the Government agent 200 bags to be de- stroyed, that is, burned up. It is said that this measure cannot be practically carried out, and that it will fail, especially as it is to be enforced in only one of the five coffee-growing States. Dur- ing the month of August a New York syndicate, that had a large speculative interest in the market, endeavored to advance prices by manipulation, but although they were aided by a temporary drought and a light frost, they relinquished the contract." In Greece, where there is an overproduction of currants it may be mentioned that currants of commerce are not the garden currants that we know in America, but a small grape the Government is also arranging to have a part of the crop destroyed and is passing strict laws against the further extension of planting. In California the orange growers are not sufficiently organized as yet to have part of the oranges destroyed in order to be able to sell the remainder at a living profit, nevertheless, there is no question but this is what must ultimately be done. For the price of the surplus de- termines the price of the whole. If the surplus sells at a loss, the entire crop sells at a loss. For instance, if there are a million boxes of oranges for sale, and there is a demand for only 900,000, then the extra hundred thousand must be slaughtered at any price, and the price upon this hundred thousand will apply to the whole million. It is evident there- fore, there being a market for 900,000, that it is better to destroy the 100,000 and get a living price for the remaining 900,000 than to try and sell the whole million at a loss. 118 Socialism Inevitable That is, the total returns to the growers for the 900,000 boxes at a high price will be much better than for the million boxes at a low price. The problem the California growers have to solve, however, is how to compensate the growers of the 100,000 boxes which should be destroyed. This would necessitate such a close organization that it is very problematical whether it can be formed until the growers have become better disciplined. Of course all this discussion about destroying the fruits of the earth when so many people need them, would seem absurd if it be not always remembered that we are living under an absurd system. Here we have the earth so prolific that we are actually threatened with starvation unless we destroy some of the food which we have produced. When we abolish our competitive system and introduce a co-operative system of distribution, we will never raise more than we need, because production will be systematically planned ; and if at any time we find that more labor is directed toward the production of a certain commodity than is required, it will mean either a reduction in the hours of labor or the transfer of the laborers to some other industry. To-day, however, our competitive wage system so limits the effective demand of the people that it is folly for us to expect consumption to keep up with pro- duction, A Financial Cataclysm Inevitable 119 a financial cataclysm inevitable (August, 1903O ALL political questions to-day resolve themselves into the one problem : how can a man get a just equivalent for his labor? I doubt if there is a single issue, which, upon analysis, cannot be reduced to this simple proposition, or if the term be preferred, to the question of distribution. The problem of the production of commodities sufficient for the wants of the earth's inhabitants has been completely solved, and we no longer talk of the growth of population exceeding productivity. But the equally vital problem of distribution is still with us, an increasing menace to our very existence. Now it would hardly seem necessary to emphasize the fact, it is so self-evident, that our competitive wage system by limiting the laborer to the wage demanded by his unemployed fellow-laborer, thereby restricts his powers of consumption to the mere minimum of existence. Yet the fact is one that is being constantly overlooked, an oversight that is responsible for no small proportion of the errors in our so-called science of political economy. There was a time when all the pro- fessors of political economy said that any theory which in- volved the admission that there could be such a thing as general overproduction was, upon the face of it, absurd ; that it was impossible and absurd to conceive that the earth should produce so much food and clothing that the people could not get enough. They said that the explanation of an apparent condition of overproduction was that it was purely local. If the Canadians, for instance, were producing more wheat than they wanted, and the Cubans were growing more bananas than they wanted, matters would adjust themselves as soon as both Canadians and Cubans became aware of the actual conditions. As soon as this knowledge should prevail, an exchange would be made whereupon the whole problem would be solved. 120 Socialism Inevitable It is, of course, true enough that often under our com- petitive system there are conditions wherein there is over- production of a certain commodity in a certain place, and that a proper commercial knowledge of this condition would so facilitate the distribution of the excess product that the overproduction would soon be relieved, and normal conditions re-established. But taking a more general view, and realiz- ing that the competitive wage system exists throughout the civilized world, it cannot be lost sight of for a moment that it is easily possible to have general "overproduction" simply because we have an inadequate system of distribution, a system that fails to distribute the products of labor among those who produce it, viz., the workers. It will at once be urged that if competition limits the laborers' consumption so that overproduction must ensue, how is it that we do not have overproduction continuously, and why have we not been compelled long ago to abandon our competitive system ? The reason is that overproduction arises from the use of machinery, and as the era of modern machinery began little more than fifty years ago, the problem must necessarily be of comparatively recent origin. Much of this time, moreover, we have been utilizing the surplus, above and beyond what the laborers consume, in the production of more and more machinery. Now if this process of transforming the surplus into new machinery could continue forever there would never be any permanently insoluble unemployed problem. There might be temporary crises and local states of overproduction; but the capitalists would eventually discover where machinery and labor were most needed, and would so be able to alleviate any local unemployed problems. For the capitalist to-day has a universal eye. Kailroads in China, oil refineries in Eussia, cotton mills in India he furnishes them all, quite indifferent as to nationality. When a system of underground electric railroads is needed in London, and the British capital- ist cannot see that it will be a profitable undertaking, an American sees differently and builds them. The capitalist is a man to whom patriotism is not even a last refuge; he never considers it at all. Whatever country needs his money gets it, the only condition being that he is guaranteed safety and a return of dividends. A Financial Cataclysm Inevitable 121 In whatever country he may invest his money, however, it will be found upon ultimate analysis that he is building this machinery in order to feed and clothe the working class and the farmers. Not that he has any philanthropic reasons for this procedure, but simply because these constitute the only body of consumers that is of sufficient importance to be considered. It is true that capital may be invested in a steel mill in Pittsburg, and it may appear that because the steel rail is sold to the Vanderbilts for their railways, that this is an undertaking which cannot be classed with those giving food and clothing to the working class. Yet it must be remembered that Vanderbilt buys steel rails only for use upon railroads which are to be used largely to carry wheat and pork and cloth for distribution to the aforesaid workers. So, whichever way we may look we will always discover that although the commodity turned out by the capitalist cannot itself be consumed by the worker, still it is indirectly connected with some industry that produces a commodity for the work- ingman's direct consumption, that is, his food, his clothing, or his house. Hence our whole system of industry is an inverted pyramid, its apex being the consumptive ability of the worker. This ability to consume, being strictly limited by the competitive nature of the system, the pyramid can remain where it is only by means of the continued production of labor-saving machinery. For example, we build a steel mill, and find out that by building a larger and better one, we can save labor. We dismantle the first mill and build a second, and when this is finished we may go through a similar process and build even a third with a still better equipment. Seventy years ago we built an Erie Canal which carried water four feet in depth, and accommodated a canal boat of seventy-five tons. Then we deepened it to seven feet, which accommodated boats of 250 tons; while our present plan calls for a depth of twelve feet, to admit vessels of 1,000 tons. And it is possible that in ten or fifteen years we may decide to enlarge again and have ships of 2,000 tons. Now all this construction of new iron mills, new canals, etc., means the opening of so many new channels for the distribution of the surplus products made by labor; and if, as said, this could be continued indefinitely and upon a large 122 Socialism Inevitable enough scale there would never be any question about the continuance of prosperity and constant employment for the workingman. Of course this would be simply building canals and mills in order to give ourselves employment, much in the way that men upon a warship are kept holystoning the decks; and there are a good many people who imagine that this is the highest and best life to live. However, as the machinery is built expressly to furnish goods to the laborers, and as the laborers' capacity to consume is limited by their wages to a mere minimum of existence, it is evident that the day will finally come when we will have too much machinery. And the Trust is the sign that that day is at hand, its very existence being a proof of over- production, since it means the recognition by the capitalist class that our industrial machinery has attained a stage of practical completion. That continued expansion, though impossible, is necessary for the perpetuation of the existing commercial system is well known, and admitted by all competent writers upon the subject. For instance, there recently appeared a very striking article in the New York Sun, which is so able that I have decided to incorporate it bodily herewith: WE NEED LARGER FOREIGN MARKETS. The market value of the manufactured products of the United States for 1902 was, approximately, $15,000,000,000. This is the product of more than half a million establishments, whose total capitalization exceeds $10,000,000,000, and in which some seven million of our people find employment. This truly enormous business becomes only the more imposing when one realizes how large a percentage of it is of recent development. Within a quarter of a century the number of our factories has doubled, their capitalization has quadrupled, the number of their em- ployees has increased nearly three times, and the value of their output has grown from the $5,500,000,000 of 1880 to the $15,000,- 000,000 of 1902. In connection with such a statement there arises, naturally, a question of the disposition of so enormous a quantity of mer- chandise. Where does it go? Who uses it? It is probable that the off-hand judgment of many would declare that much of the increase was due to the increase in our export trade. Yet the fact is that we export only about 3 per cent, of it. Of the Ameri- can manufactured wares of 1902, 97 per cent, in value was con- sumed in the best market which the United States has the domestic. It went to a trade with which the American manu- facturer is familiar to customers whose wants, habits and tastes A Financial Cataclysm Inevitable 123 he understands. It was sold under commercial laws and financial conditions with which he is fully acquainted. The American manufacturer knows his home trade, knows how to get it, and caters to it. He studies the requirements of his market, and that market is at all times quickly and easily reached. Credit sys- tems, banking and transportation facilities make his domestic trade a simple process in comparison with export trade. For these reasons American energy is bent toward securing and holding American trade against both domestic and foreign com- petition. But there is another side to this trade question which is growing beyond general realization. Within a quarter of a century the output of manufactured products has increased 200 per cent. Actual producing capacity has probably increased much beyond that, inasmuch as few establishments are run con- tinually to the full extent of their producing power. But the number of domestic consumers has increased only a little more than 50 per cent, within the same period. Two influences appear. One is that we now manufacture at home many of those articles which twenty-five years ago we imported. The other is that the consuming capacity of our population has increased more rapidly than has the number of consumers. Standards of living are higher and individual requirements are greater than they were a quarter of a century ago. Individual wants increase with the ability of the individual to gratify them, and national pros- perity has transformed much that was a luxury of the last generation into an ordinary comfort or a seeming necessity for the present generation. Yet, even with these important in- fluences, the fact stands that consuming power has not kept pace with the vast increase in producing power, and American manu- facturers are coming into more and more direct confrontation with an ever-increasing surplus of manufactured wares beyond the requirements of the home market. There are two lines of possible determination of the question, and only two. One is limitation of output, the other an exten- sion of markets. We look at our export trade in manufactured goods and see its increase from $100,000,000 in 1880 to $150,000,000 in 1890, and then its tremendous leap to more than $400,000,000 in 1902. The dazzle of these figures blinds us to their real significance. Diverted by a striking incident, we lose sight of the main issue. That issue does not lie in the mere fact that there has been a very gratifying increase. It rests in the question of the great probability of serious reaction upon domestic interests if that export trade be not indefinitely extended within the near future. Already careful students of the situation are asking each other how long we can continue to absorb at home a percentage of our products which will avert glutted markets and depreciated prices. Let there be assumed a continuance of our present prosperity, of big crops and busy mills and well paid labor. There must be an even greater prosperity and even bigger crops, with a profitable 124 Socialism Inevitable market for them, if the ever-increasing mills are to find a domes- tic market for their ever-increasing production. Closely inter- woven as our industries are, a cessation of activity in any one of our leading lines reacts upon other lines. The cry of "over- production" or of "underproduction," call it which you will, is quickly raised, and commercial uncertainty paves the way to commercial stagnation. A market clogged with the products of our factories compels the stoppage of production, limits the general consuming power, enforces general economy in the household, and opens the door to hard times. It has pleased various writers and public officials to regale us with exuberant tales of the "American invasion" of this, that and the other market. As yet our exports of manufactured goods fill only a very small hole in the world's markets, and our in- creased exports are not due so much to our inroads upon the trade of our competitors as they are to our participation in a general increase of world business. That our export trade in manufactured goods has grown is as gratifying as it is undeni- able. But there are these three facts which remain for the thoughtful consideration of our commercial and financial classes: 1. That we now export only 3 per cent, of the products of our shops, mills and factories. 2. That we now secure only about 10 per cent, of the world's import trade in manufactured goods. 3. That our market is not keeping pace with our increasing facilities for production. Stagnation in American factories is now only less pregnant with menace to American interests than is failure in our crops. It will be noticed that the Sun never considers that the only way to get a greater domestic market is to increase the wages of what it terms "well-paid labor." But ignoring this self-evident solution is characteristic of all such attempts to solve the current industrial problem. Of course, to increase wages to any considerable degree under a competitive system is practically impossible. The trades unions are doing a great deal, but their efforts apply to only a small proportion of the wage-earning class, and even when they do get what they demand, the total increase is so small that it makes no appreciable reduction of the surplus produced above and beyond what their wages allow them to buy. The solution of the problem can be found only in the co- operative wage system, and this system can be introduced only by the establishment of public ownership of the means of production. The inevitable solution of the next economic crisis is to be found in the motto of this magazine: Let the Nation Own the Trusts. Undigested Securities 125 UNDIGESTED SECURITIES (October, 1903.) THEEE has been considerable discussion in the news- papers about the menace to our industrial situation in the unwillingness or inability of the public to buy a large mass of securities, bonds, stocks, etc., which Mr. Morgan and his associates have recently issued in connection with the various enterprises incorporated by these esteemed gentlemen. In order to understand the economic position clearly, let us suppose that there are but three capitalists in the world, viz.: Morgan, Vanderbilt and Eockefeller, and that these three own the whole earth. They look over the map and decide that certain railroads, canals and steel works shall be built to give better facilities for the production of material commodities. Now suppose they detail, after a careful calcu- lation, say, two-thirds of the inhabitants of the earth to the work of manufacturing the food, clothing, housing, etc., which they find necessary for the whole of the inhabitants. And suppose they divide the remaining one-third into two parts, detailing one part, i. e., one-sixth of the whole, to construct and establish such new industries as they think are wanted, and the other one-sixth to producing luxuries for themselves and working as their servants or retainers. This is practically the industrial process now going on. As long as Vanderbilt, Morgan and Eockefeller can keep the whole six-sixths of us at work, there is no danger of any unemployed problem, nor will there be any trouble about undigested securities. If it takes two-thirds of the earth's population to produce wealth enough for the whole, it is evident that if any larger part than the remaining one-third were devoted to the production of new machinery or luxuries, then the excess must be subtracted from the two thirds ; that is, from the number necessary to feed the whole. In other words, supposing the capitalists were so eager to build new railroads, or so greedy to enjoy luxuries, that they rd A 126 Socialism Inevitable employed more than one-third at such occupations, the result would be a diminution in the amount of grain and pork pro- duced, since the necessary two-thirds would not be employed at their legitimate work, and this would force part of the world to go hungry. Such would be the condition described in the economic phrase, "Too much floating capital has become fixed capital." That is, we would be building railroads more rapidly than we could afford to. Now supposing that Mr. Vanderbilt desired to build more railroads than Mr. Eockefeller thought the world could afford, and that Mr. Eockefeller, therefore, refused to join him, and should say to Mr. Vanderbilt: "Look here, Vanderbilt, you may go ahead and build as many railroads as you wish: I will lend you money to do it if you will pledge your part of the world to me as security for your payment/' In other words, Mr. Vanderbilt assumes the risk and will get the profits and meet the losses, while Rockefeller advances the money and simply gets interest; and this advance of money means that Rockefeller allows Vanderbilt part of the product of his laborers to feed and clothe Vanderbilt's laborers while they produce more railroads for him. If, before the completion of the railroad, or even after it, Rockefeller should demand payment from Vanderbilt of what had been lent to him, and Vanderbilt could not pay, of course Rockefeller would be in a position to seize Vanderbilt's share of the earth, that is, he would foreclose his mortgage. Of course if Rockefeller were willing to wait, Vanderbilt might finally pay him off, but it might be that conditions would arise that would force Rockefeller to insist upon immediate payment, and then Vanderbilt would be in a bad way. By immediate payment, as things go to-day, we mean payment in gold. But gold is obtained from the laborer who mines it by the exchange of other commodities produced by other laborers ; so that Vanderbilt's laborers would in time produce sufficient food to feed other laborers digging out gold, and this gold would first go into Vanderbilt's hands and thence to Rockefeller in payment of the debt. All this, however, would take time, and time might be the element most im- portant in the case, and hence most vital in determining whether Vanderbilt could liquidate his indebtedness or should lose his third of the earth by foreclosure. Undigested Securities 127 Now suppose Vanderbilt is building railroads to-day, that he is issuing bonds and stocks upon these railroads which are virtually notes of indebtedness, and that he expects to sell these stocks and bonds to Eockefeller. If, for some reason, Kockefeller does not buy with the avidity that he might be expected to, Vanderbilt would find himself with a lot of "undigested securities" on hand which he could not dispose of. In the course of time, Vanderbilt himself might take them up from the income of his own properties, and also in course of time Kockefeller and Morgan, from the income of their properties, might have a surplus on hand and buy such secur- ities. All this again is but a question of time. A man eats a hearty dinner : if he is in a healthy condition and you give him time, he will digest it, and nothing else but time can effect digestion. And so it is with the problem of "undigested securities." Undigested securities, in fact, simply mean that a certain part of the capitalists have overbuilt the machinery of pro- duction, and that their bonds and securities, issued upon this footing, have not been sold to other capitalists as readily as was expected. Unless financial disturbance takes place, how- ever, this condition is of no material consequence, inasmuch as it only requires time to straighten matters out, that is, provided this inordinate construction of machinery be abated. Another phrase which is often used when issuing bonds for the payment of certain improvements is, "We will let posterity pay for this." As a matter of fact, any work that is being done on earth to-day, building railroads or anything else, can only be done by the present generation; and it is absurd to talk of a generation yet unborn performing any labor for us. If bonds are issued by a city in order to pay for its sewer system, it simply means that labor is being performed in some other part of the world, for instance, in raising wheat and pork, and that this food is lent by the capitalists constructing such improvements to the citizens of that town to feed them while they are completing their sewer, upon the pledge that said wheat and pork shall be paid back at some future day with an added percentage in the way of interest. Taking the earth as a whole, however, it is absurd to talk about posterity con- structing any present-day improvements. The "posterity" 128 Socialism Inevitable that works for us is the present generation in a different locality. The danger that we face to-day lies, not in these undigested securities, but rather in our capitalist society not having enough securities furnished to feed it. Of course we are not unlike the individual laborer who may suffer at times from indigestion caused by eating too much, though his great danger will not be in overeating, but in the possibility that some day he may not have enough to eat. The continuance of our capitalist system depends upon the construction of more and more machinery, and this machinery, whether it be a new railroad or a telegraph cable, is represented by new securities, bonds and stocks; but when the world reaches the point when no more of these machines are needed, there will be no more bonds thrown upon the market. As a consequence of this, the stock market will suffer from a scarcity of stocks rather than from a surplus, with the immediate result of a great rise in price of existing stocks and bonds, unless, which is very possible, there should be a period of such commercial depression, owing to general overproduction and the reduced earnings of all existing stocks, that prices fall even though no more stocks should be issued. Now the moment that the production of new machinery ceases, and it must cease, owing to the practical completion of our industrial equipment, we will be confronted with a great unemployed problem. But while this may appear simulta- neously with the phenomenon of "undigested securities," the only reason that they are coincident lies in the fact that the securities have been issued upon the last lot of machinery constructed, which has failed to pay dividends owing to the lack of commercial demand for such machinery. Day by day the opportunities are lessening for the invest- ment of capital in enterprises which promise safety and secur- ity. The result of this is that a great deal of machinery is likely to be manufactured for which there will be no demand in the capitalistic sense; and upon this machinery stocks and bonds will be floated which in many instances will probably never pay dividends. Such securities will of course remain "undigested," for they are in the nature of food known to be innutritious and indigestible, and consequently in no demand. In the continued appearance of this kind of securities, there Undigested Securities 129 is indeed a menace to our whole financial structure; and it is probable that many of the securities which are to-day classed among the merely "undigested" will prove to be absolutely indigestible. In fact the recent failure of the Shipbuilding Trust, and of several other great corporations, would seem to indicate that even were time given, the public will be very unlikely to take over such securities, inasmuch as there appears to be very little likelihood of their ever paying dividends. Thus one sees that the cry of "undigested" securities is of no special menace if the securities are based upon legitimate financial operations, and provided we have time to allow the public gradually to absorb them. But on the other hand, if they represent such wildcat concerns as the Shipbuilding Trust, they are a menace to our financial system and a prophecy of its early collapse. It must be borne in mind that the financial system and the industrial system, though closely related, are not necessarily affected by the same conditions. The financial systems of the world, and especially those of the United States, are of a much more delicate nature and are more liable to derangement than the industrial system. The latter will break down only when we reach the final stage of complete overproduction of mechanical equipment. Our financial system, on the other hand, can break down at any time and from a number of causes, and it is very likely that a violent financial crisis will be precipitated upon us some years ahead of the inevitable and final industrial crisis. Of course it is understood that the one will lead up to the other. Any dav might see some great banking institution break, which will pull down other banking concerns, and throw the whole financial world into a state of collapse; and this collapse would naturally bring down our industrial structure in the common ruin. Hence we may not have to wait until the industrial structure is completed until we shall see the end of our competitive system. As a matter of fact the industrial structure is already in a state so near completion that any great financial crisis is likely to usher in the transformation of society from Capital- ism to Socialism. 130 Socialism Inevitable THE SEQUEL TO A MODERN ROMANCE (November, 1903.) COMING from Venice to Vienna, after a short stay in the Austrian Tyrol, I had two delightful days in Munich with Mr. and Mrs. Serge von Shevitch. Fourteen years ago, and for the ten preceding years, Shevitch, although a Eussian by birth, was the leader of the American Socialist movement, and thereby hangs our tale. The year 1877 saw him in the United States for the first time a Russian nobleman, tall, handsome and but twenty- nine years of age. With him was his bride, the world-famous beauty, Princess Racowitz, widow of the Roumanian Prince, the woman with whom the great Ferdinand Lassalle had been so passionately in love and on whose account he lost his life in the historic duel. I will not go minutely into the story of that bit of romance in the development of Socialism : it has already been too fully exploited to bear detailed repetition. In brief, however, it is as follows: Some forty years ago a young German, Fer- dinand Lassalle, the most gifted philosopher, orator and politician of his day, organized a great working-class party in Germany, the progenitor of the existing powerful German Socialist Party, and acquired such influence that even the great Bismarck, then at the height of his power, became terrified and made him the most tempting offers of alliance. In this period of his political activity, Lassalle met and at once fell violently in love with the brilliant and beautiful daughter of Count Von Donniges, a distinguished member of the old German nobility, and Secretary of State for Bavaria. His love was returned, with nothing lost in wear and tear by the transfer, and it looked as if the world's dream of the union of her greatest man to her most beautiful woman was at last to be realized. The lady's practical and aristocratic father, however, dreamed, differently and less romantically, A title and wealth The Sequel To A Modern Eomance 131 were in his mind, and he saw them in the person of Prince Kacowitz, who had long been a persistent, but hitherto un- successful, suitor for his fair daughter's heart and hand. The father would not listen to the idea of having a mere Socialist agitator for a son-in-law, when a prince could be had for the word. Now before 1870 a father's power over his daughter, in Europe, and especially in Germany, was greater than nowa- days. The count's answer to Lassalle's demand and his daughter's lamentations was to imprison the obdurate maiden in the old ancestral castle. One night, however, after several days of captivity, she eluded the guard and escaped. Lassalle was in Switzerland. She flew to him and proposed immediate marriage, but Lassalle's pride had been wounded by the atti- tude taken by her father, and he said, "No, go back to the castle. I will not take you by stealth. I will force him to give you to me in an open and conventional manner, as a matter of justice and right." Of course, this was all false pride, and, consciously or un- consciously, must have wounded the girl's sensibilities. A man doesn't improve his position at such a time by bringing in the question of his vanity. When the lady had braved all and fled to him, it was a cruel bit of weakness and conceit to cast her back on her father's hands on the chance that he could force his consent. This episode naturally enraged the old count more than ever, and the second incarceration of his daughter was much more rigid than the first, while his remarks regarding Lassalle were so insulting that the latter could do nothing else than challenge him to a duel. Then, as the father was too old and feeble to fight, Prince Kacowitz, as the count's choice for a son-in-law, stepped to the front and accepted the challenge. Lassalle consented to the change, and, as challenger, allowed the prince to name the weapons. Now Lassalle was renowned as the best shot and swordsman in Germany, and the prince, realizing that it was practically suicide in either case, chose pistols. The duel came off, and the great Lassalle fell mortally wounded at the first exchange of shots. The prince was untouched. Then after many bitter scenes with her old father, the 132 Socialism Inevitable lady's spirit was conquered, and she consented to marry the prince. But after another two years the prince died and she was left a widow. And this is where all the other narrators of this "Komance of the Nineteenth Century" have laid down their pens. I will now give the Twentieth Century Sequel. Some years after her husband's death the princess went to Paris, where she soon became a center of attraction, owing to her beauty, grace and accomplishments, and above all, to her romantic history, which the Parisian world so well knew. Serge Von Shevitch, a rich young Kussian nobleman, was then a new arrival in Paris, the handsomest and most brilliant of all the jeunesse doree. But a few years out of the Univer- sity, where he and Stepniak, already a revolutionist, and afterwards well known as a Nihilist, had been classmates, Shevitch had become a Socialist ; and this at once put him on a good footing with the old sweetheart of Lassalle. The courtship was ardent, the United States being their dream of Utopia. Marriage ensued, and New York became the home of the young couple. The Socialist Party of America was then in its infancy. The Volhszeitung, the German Socialist daily of New York, had just been launched, and was struggling in a very stormy sea. An editor was badly needed, and the appearance of Shevitch seemed to the Socialists as a gift sent by the gods. He soon became not only the life of the paper, but of the whole Socialist movement in the city; and thirty years ago New York spelled America for Socialism. A brilliant writer and eloquent orator, of commanding personal appearance, equally at home in the German and English languages, Shevitch was indeed an invaluable ac- quisition to the Cause. From 1879 to 1890 he remained editor of the Volkszeitung, but was equally famous as a public speaker and debater. Possibly the best remembered event, of which he was the hero, was the memorable debate in Cooper Union, when he so completely crushed the late Henry George, the great single taxer. Mrs. Shevitch, like her husband, be- came a notable figure in New York and is still remembered by the many American friends she gathered about her. In 1890, much to the consternation and sorrow of the New York Socialists, the Shevitches returned to Kussia. The The Sequel To A Modern Romance 133 change, however, was imperative. Shevitch had inherited large estates, and the Russian law provides that if an owner remains absent from Russia beyond a certain fixed period of time, his lands become forfeited to the crown. After living quietly for a few years in Russia on his estate, just sufficient time, in fact, to allow him to dispose to advantage of his lands, Shevitch and his wife removed to Munich, where they have been living ever since, and where I had the pleasure of visiting them the other day. Shevitch is still as vigorous and hand- some as ever, though he is now fifty-five ; while Madam She- vitch possesses all the charm which rendered her so irresist- ible in years gone by. They live delightfully in their Munich home, their dinners being quite the best I have had in Europe ; but I am in hopes of some day seeing them back again in America if not permanently, at least for a long visit. Shevitch is taking little or no part at present in the active movement. The German government, in fact, does not allow aliens to participate in politics, and as they have at the same time refused him naturalization papers, he is quite cut off from active participation in the German Socialist movement. Shevitch looks forward to the granting of a constitution in Russia within such a limited number of years that he him- self will be able to return to his native land and take an active part in the rapidly growing movement for Socialism. He says that practically all the educated men in Russia, outside of the bureaucracy, are in favor of a constitution, and that the pressure is becoming too great for the autocracy to resist much longer. 134 Socialism Inevitable WHITE COLLARS AND A YELLOW PRESS (December, 1903.) TO those not behind the scenes, the editorial policy of the Hearst papers seems absolutely without reason. One day they favor one thing and the next day, the opposite. To-day they advocate the destruction of the trusts and to- morrow, the national ownership of the trusts. All of which is very confusing. But when one remembers that in order to make a great paper successful it is necessary to have the backing of one of the principal political parties, light is thrown upon the mys- tery. Mr. Hearst is shrewd enough to know that the current of public opinion in this country is rapidly setting toward public ownership, not only of municipal utilities, but also of railways and trusts. He also knows that there are millions of people who favor this without in the least realizing that it is Socialistic, or that it tends toward Socialism. He would, therefore, catch this class of ignorant readers for his news- papers, and would have them believe that he is the chief and only exponent of such views. If he should let them know that the platform he stands on in this particular is practically the same as that of the Socialists, he fears not only the connection of his name with Socialism, but also the likelihood that he would receive partial credit only for the views pre- sented in his editorial columns. The Socialist Party is comparatively small and obscure as yet, and for Hearst to wind up his Socialist editorials by advising his readers to vote the Socialist ticket, would un- doubtedly alienate a good many of his Democratic followers, and would be entirely inconsistent with his ambition to be the next Democratic nominee for President. It is clear, therefore, that Hearst is perfectly logical in his apparently illogical course of glorifying Socialism in the abstract, but damning the Socialists who propose to put the system in practice. The following editorial taken from the New York Journal, of September 18th, is a striking corroboration of the foregoing : White Collars And A Yellow Press 135 The Social Democratic Party in Germany is a powerful and splendid proof of German courage and independence. In the face of government oppression, in the face of military oppression, in the face of aristocratic pretensions and snubs and sneers, in the face of clerical oppression the Social Democrats of Germany have built themselves into the greatest political party in the land, three millions of earnest, unselfish, thinking men. This great body of the actual common people can be looked upon only with respect and reverence here in America, where all our sympathies must be with the class that fights imperialism. The leading Social Democrats of Germany are great men and educated men. Herr Bebel, Herr von Vollmar and the other leaders are men of unselfish devotion, and at the same time of earnest thought and thorough education. The future of Germany is in their hands. They will solve the military and all other German questions. In the meantime the army, pride of the Emperor's heart, is manufacturing Social Democrats every day, catching the peasant boy, awkward and ungainly, in his country village, kicking him and cuffing him simultaneously into a trained soldier and a Social Democrat who hates the laws that cuffed him. We wish to-day to speak of the statement made by an Ameri- can Socialist at the Germans' Socialistic Congress at Dresden. This individual, alleged to represent the United States Social- ists, declared that a Socialistic crisis would come first in America, that the development of the trusts would bring about Socialism in this country. We cannot express for the American Socialist Party the same admiration as we feel for the Social Democrats of Germany. The German Social Democrat is a serious, earnest man, pro- testing against imperialism, militarism, special privileges for the noble, special oppressions for the people. What he asks for, any decent American citizen would ask for, if he lived in Germany. The American Socialist is, with honorable exceptions, not to be classed with the Social Democrat of Germany. He is a man who often expresses a social dissatisfaction based upon personal failure. He is very apt to be loud rather than profound. He is as a rule not an educated man, and his de- mands and urgings are based too often on ignorance. The statement that the trusts in the United States will bring about Socialism in the United States is ignorant; it shows a lack of understanding of to-day's problems. Socialism properly understood ought to mean the betterment of social conditions. If Socialism be defined as the improvement of social condi- tions, then, of course, every good citizen is a Socialist. For every good citizen knows that social conditions ought to be better. Admitting such a definition of Socialism, it may truthfully be 136 Socialism Inevitable aaid that the trusts will bring about Socialism; that is to say, better social conditions. We believe that industry among human beings is destined to pass through three phases the phases of competition, of organ- ization, of emulation. Civilization has spent thousands of years in the competitive system. Out of a hundred business men, ninety-nine have failed one hundred business enterprises have landed ninety- nine men with broken hearts, broken hopes, and one man with money in his pocket and a broken digestion. Competition encouraged the merchant to sell adulterated goods, bogus goods, worthless goods. It encouraged him to pay his employees as little as he could in order to compete with others who hired employees, and to charge his customers as much as he could. The competitive system is now dying a slow death. Already the system of organization has arrived and the trusts represent this system. It is crude and selfish, it takes for a few big organized pirates the enormous sums that used to be distributed among a great many little competitive pirates. But organization, even under trust management, is a step in the right direction. The trust that is combining the nation's industries into a few companies paves the way certainly and surely for national owner- ship. When one man, or half a dozen men, shall own all the rail- roads of the United States there will be interference by the people sooner or later. When one man, or a few men, shall own all the steel mills, all the coal mines and the oil wells, all the street-car lines there will be interference by the people sooner or later. When it is clearly proved that one man, or a few men, can run the business of a nation, that the much vaunted competition is not the life of trade but an indication of savagery, then the people will say to the one man, or the few men, "We, the people, will own the business of the people, and not you, an individual." In pursuance of his policy not to mention the names of Socialists more than is absolutely necessary, it will be noticed that Hearst alludes to the editor of this paper, who happened to be the American delegate at the convention referred to, as "this individual." In the cablegram from Germany, how- ever, upon which the editorial was based, and which appeared in another column of the same issue, he was forced to allow the name of Wilshire to appear. Mr. Hearst says that the American Socialists are not good enough to be classed with the Socialists of Germany; neverthe- White Collars And A Yellow Press 137 less, the fact remains that the latter receive their American comrades as brothers, and are only too glad to have us at their conventions, and to extend to us all the courtesies cus- tomary to the members of the same party. Pursuing his general policy of misrepresentation, Hearst naturally meets with the difficulty encountered by all imagina- tive writers, of making his stories agree at every point. It will be seen that the editorial starts out by saying that "the statement that the trusts in the United States will bring about Socialism in the United States is ignorant, and shows lack of understanding of to-day's problems." This is followed, a little later on, by a statement of his own that "the Trust that is combining the nation's industries into a few companies, is paving the way certainly and surely for national ownership. . . . When one man or a few men shall own all the steel mills, all the coal mines, all the oil wells and all the street-car lines, there will be interference by the people sooner or later. When it is clearly proved that one man, or a few men, can run the business of the nation. . . . then the people will say to the one man, or the few men, "We, the people, will own the business of the people, and not you, an individual." The distinction, in Mr. Hearst's mind, between the two statements seems to be that one is made by a member of the Socialist Party and the other is not. When "this individual" says that the trusts are paving the way for Socialism it is "ignorant," but when Hearst makes the statement himself it is the quintessence of wisdom. Again, he says that the Socialists are men who have failed in life, and who neglect to wash their hands or wear clean collars. Granting this to be true it would not invalidate the argu- ments of Socialism. A great many men in the world's history, who have not been noted for clean collars, have given to the world the profoundest truths. We do not judge of Truth by the source from which it comes. Truth speaks for itself. Mr. Hearst may congratulate himself that we have passed the stage where the truth of a man's statement is determined either by the whiteness of his collar or the yellowness of his journal. 138 Socialism Inevitable THE SIPPERS OF CARLSBAD (December, 1905.) TOO much eating and too little exercise does not fall to the lot of everyone in Austria. The standard of wages is not conducive to the laying up of too much adipose tis- sue on the bones of the ordinary laborer, nor has he such short hours of work that he fails to get enough daily exercise. How- ever true all this may be, there are, out of the forty million people in the Austrian Empire, a good many thousands who are unlucky enough not to belong to the wage-earning class; consequently many of them are forced to seek an alternative to hard work and plain living in taking "die Kur" at Carlsbad. There are about fifty thousand visitors to the springs each year, and while all the world contributes its quota, the great bulk of the visitors four-fifths are Germans and Austrians. There are about one thousand Englishmen and a little over two thousand Americans. The season opens in May, is at its height about the 20th of July, when 12,000 are here, and closes in October. The water is just as good in winter and quite as hot, for the Sprudel Spring has a constant tempera- ture of 163 degrees Fahrenheit, but man does not live by bread alone, and neither is he cured solely by Carlsbad water. How much of the cure comes from the water, indeed, and how much from the regimen will ever remain a vexed question. The cure consists in getting up at six in the morning, walking down to one of the various springs, dipping up a cup of water, and slowly drinking it by sips, until four or five cups are swallowed. This should take, say, half an hour, during which you are parading up and down a fine covered colonnade, with thousands of other drinkers, each holding his cup in hand, and taking an occasional sip. Meanwhile, the Carlsbad Band plays most delightful music for you and the other peripatetic sippers. When the water is all down you continue to walk for one The Sippers Of Carlsbad 139 hour and then have a light breakfast, without sweets or coffee. At two, you dine, then take another walk, and at seven you sup lightly, and after still another walk go to bed. The water is taken only once a day, in the morning. The cure takes at least four weeks and preferably six. Carlsbad is in itself a delightful resort, with beautiful shady walks and excellent hotels, having accommodations suited to all kinds of purses. For, while the rich are much in evidence, it would be unfair not to state that at least half, if not more, are invalids who are far from rich. In fact, it is quite probable that poor food and over-work have driven just as many to Carlsbad as have rich food and no work. Indeed, the trouble with modern life is that it is all extremes, with no happy medium. A man is ill either from too much work or from too little. Carlsbad is a good example of the possibilities of municipal Socialism. The city owns the springs, the gas and electric lights, the magnificent bath house, and one of the most beau- tiful and best arranged theatres in the world. Nevertheless, the wages paid employees by the city are no better, nor are the hours any shorter, than those obtaining under private employers. Passing through Belgium, I asked the guard upon the Belgian National Railway about his wages, and conditions of work. He said that he was now getting $216 a year; that he had started in at $180 ; that at the end of forty years' ser- vice he would be getting $510, and could then retire upon a pension of $360 a year. He paid $12 for his uniform, which lasted two years, and for his board and lodging, $11 per month. He was liable to thirteen hours' work a day, seven days in the week; but said that the actual hours of work did not average more than ten. He was a bright, intelligent young fellow of twenty- three, and seemed quite content ; so much so that he was not a Socialist and took no interest in the subject. 140 Socialism Inevitable MONOPOLY A NECESSITY (January, 1904.) THE series of interesting articles upon Mr. Rockefeller is still running in McClwe's Magazine. The author is Miss Tarbell, and her story certainly shows great ability in the gathering and arrangement of the data. It would seem, however, that if she once grasped the fact that Mr. Rockefeller was forced by unavoidable circumstances to pursue his path of consolidation, she would write a more sympathetic article and one in which the philosophy would be more apparent. No causality enters into her story, nor does she correlate her facts, as she might easily do, by making the predominating note the necessity of things. If a leak be found in a Mississippi River levee it demands instant attention, for every drop of water that goes through increases the opening, until finally the crevice becomes so great that nothing can prevent the ruin of the fertile fields that lie beyond. No sacrifice is too great for the planters to make to prevent such a leak, and nothing is considered a greater crime than to weaken the levee. Indeed, during periods of flood, patrols walk up and down armed with rifles, to shoot down any pilot who runs his steamboat so near to the levee that the wash from the boat might damage it. Competition in a business, like the production and refining of oil, or, in fact, any business furnishing a commodity of which price is a determining factor in finding a market, is just as dangerous to the stability of that business as a break in the levee is to a plantation on the banks of the Mississippi. If competition is not stopped at once, it grows worse and worse, until finally the business is swamped. For instance, here is Mr. Rockefeller with a monopoly of the oil business. A small refiner, say, like Mr. George Rice, of Marietta, competes with him. Mr. Rice, in order to sell his oil, sells it at a little lower price than Mr. Rockefeller sells his. Mr. Rockefeller, however, continues to hold up the price, Monopoly A Necessity 141 so that Mr. Rice is enabled to make money, even if he must take a cent a gallon less than Mr. Rockefeller. Then Mr. Rice uses the profits that he so makes in enlarging his re- finery, and next month is able to sell still more oil ; whereupon he again uses the profits for still further enlargements. Mean- while, it must be understood that Mr. Rockefeller has more than enough refineries to supply the market, and sees some of them standing idle because he has closed them to prevent the lowering of price by the production of too much oil. That is, Rockefeller holds up the umbrella to protect Rice, or, ixi other words, benefits his rival by limiting production. Now what would happen if Mr. Rockefeller allowed this thing to go on ? Mr. Rice would finally have just as large a plant as Mr. Rockefeller, the market would soon be flooded, and both would go down in a common sea of bankruptcy through the ruinous prices resulting from this overproduction. We justify a man going to any extreme to preserve his own life and that of his family. Self-preservation is the first lw of nature. A man's business is his support in life, and if you take that away you take away his life as well. It may seem absurd to talk about such a small competitor as Mr. Rice taking away the life of the Standard Oil Trust; but a little mole may start a hole in the levee which will develop into a crevasse allowing the Mississippi to sweep away a whole county. Hence, when we hear tales of the Standard Oil Trust having gone to the utmost extreme in order to extermi- nate competitors, even to blowing up their oil refineries with dynamite, we need not be astonished at the heroic measures employed. It is simply a question of self-preservation. When the trades unions resort to every possible means, legal or illegal, to prevent even one "scab" doing work in competition with the union, they are pursuing exactly the same policy. They know that if one scab is allowed to work, more scabs will come in, and finally there will be enough at work to break up the union. The number of non-union men employed in a shop may be insignificant as compared with the number of union men, but it presents just the same kind of danger that Mr. Rice's small capital against the enormous capital of the Standard Oil Company does, if allowed to exist in com- petition with it. This necessity for the extermination of competitors in the 142 Socialism Inevitable capitalistic world is going to be brought very clearly before us during the next year, when profits and interest approach the vanishing point, co-incident with the disappearance of pros- perity. The necessity for monopoly is going to be infinitely more apparent in the near future than it has ever been in the past. This will apply to the trades unionists as well as to the capitalists, and all possible means to secure it will probably be used by both sides. Mr. Gompees And His Little Plan 143 MR. GOMPERS AND HIS LITTLE PLAN (January, 1904.) THE American Federation of Labor, by a vote of more than five to one, has decided that it doesn't want any close connection between the political and the economic movements of the working class. Mr. Gompers, the president of the Federation, took occa- sion during the debate on the subject to declare to the Social- ists : "Economically you are unsound, socially you are wrong, and industrially you are an impossibility/' Such remarks from Mr. Gompers naturally aroused more or less annoyance not only among the Socialist delegates at the convention, but also among Socialists generally throughout the country. But what else could we expect? Mr. Gompers spoke from his own particular trade union standpoint, and trade union- ism is essentially a movement to raise wages. That this is a difficult task goes without saying. It is difficult enough when the whole attention of organized labor is devoted to this one object, and dividing the attention certainly would not make the task any lighter. Such is the position taken by Mr. Gompers and Mr. Mitchell and the rest of the trade unionists pure and simple, and I do not deny that there is more or less logic in it. Neither Mr. Gompers nor Mr. Mitchell, however, under- stands the present economic situation and its natural evolu- tion. They look upon Socialism as if it were a scheme of industrial government to be imposed upon us by the con- scious action of the working class, along the line of a pre- determined plan. That it is coming about as the natural and inevitable result of industrial and social evolution has never even occurred to them. The Socialist Party at the last election cast a very small percentage of the general vote. If Gompers should advise trade unionists to attach themselves to this small party, he knows enough to know that he would influence only a 144 Socialism Inevitable small percentage of the trade -unionists, and that little good could accrue to the Socialist movement, while much harm might result to the trade unions. He also knows that such advocacy would cost him his office. Many of the trade unionists are good Democrats or good Republicans, as the case may be, and have as much affection for their respective parties as a Methodist has for his church. Some, indeed, would rather abandon their union than their party. To ask a Eepublican trade unionist to attach himself to the Socialist Party would be almost like asking a Methodist to become a Roman Catholic. It takes a long process of education to make a Socialist, and particularly is this true when the man has been doing as well as has the average trade unionist for the last four or five years. He is quite satisfied with the existing system which has given him a steady job, and though he asks for more if he thinks he can get it, often in his inmost heart he thinks he is get- ting all that is his due. The knowledge that he produces a great deal more than the very best paid tTade unionist receives, and the conviction that he should get the whole of his product, is not as yet widely prevalent among the trade unionists. Nevertheless, President Gompers himself admitted that conditions for the next year are not going to be analogous to those of the past four years. He knows that we are approaching a period of great depression, and has warned the capitalists that they ought not to meet this by reducing wages. He has, in fact, adopted the Socialist argument, that inasmuch as the work- ing class constitutes the great bulk of consumers, any reduc- tion in wages will reduce the demand for commodities to just the extent of that reduction, and render the problem of overproduction still more insoluble. The idea of Gompers appealing to the capitalists to keep up wages in a time of falling prices and overproduction is a more palpably Utopian scheme than anything the Social- ists ever dreamed of presenting. For instance, here, say, are the cotton mills encountering a reduction in the price of cotton cloth. They have as alternatives, either to shut down the mills altogether or to reduce wages so as to decrease the cost of the cloth, and enable them to make and sell their product without loss. According to Gompers' plan they Mr. Gompers And His Little Plan 145 would go ahead paying the same wages as at present, in order to give the mill workers an opportunity of buying more cloth than they could if wages were reduced. If the cotton mill owners were the only employers of labor in the world, this plan might work well enough; but inasmuch as they are engaged in competition with all the rest of the world, and as the laborers spend but a very small proportion of their wages in buying cotton cloth, and the far greater proportion in buying bread and meat and sugar and paying rent, it can be seen that the cotton mill owners personally would get a very small direct benefit through keeping up wages in the cotton mills. The plan is self-evidently an impossibility. With the period of depression and falling prices that we are now enter- ing upon in the United States, the capitalists must either reduce wages or shut down the factories. Even the reduction of wages will be at best only a temporary expedient, how- ever, and we will finally have to shut down the factories anyway. Gompers, therefore, is right in saying that the working class constitutes the bulk of the consumers, and that cutting down their wages will hasten the coming of the unemployed problem; but in the meantime cutting down the wages does give the capitalist a chance to breathe a little longer, and the meantime is very important. When the Federation of Labor meets next year conditions are going to be very different. There will be no mutual congratulations about the prosperity of trade unionism, in- crease of wages and winning of strikes; but on the contrary a very mournful tale will be told of the breaking up of the unions, a large decrease in the membership of the Federation, a great reduction of wages and hundreds of thousands of members out of employment. Gompers' absurd plan of having the capitalists pay high wages during periods of depression will not even be mentioned. The question as to whether Socialism is an industrial im- possibility, as Mr. Gompers has proclaimed, will probably be the particular subject of discussion. Certainly the existing system of competition will have proved itself to be an im- possibility and will be so realized by a great many out-of- work trade unionists. For when a man is out of employment he is very apt to have his ideas shaken as to the eternal 146 Socialism Inevitable goodness of the existing system, even if he does adore Mr. Gompers. Hence, with competition found to be impossible, and Socialism declared by Gompers to be impracticable, the trade unionist will indeed be in a perplexed state of mind. Whatever way he may look he will see no land in sight. However, with the collapse of the present wage system, it is probable that the deference he now shows to Mr. Gompers' view of Socialism may be considerably modified. Yet so long as we can get along at all with the present system, no change will be made. Man, as a rule, is loath to do anything until he has to, and naturally when it comes to making such a vast change as that from one social system to another, he is not likely to act until it has become a vital necessity. But this is the point, it seems to me, which is likely to be reached before a great many years. Trade unions are of benefit to the laborer only when there is a demand for labor, just as the Trust is of benefit to the capitalist only when there is a demand for capital. The trade union prevents competition among laborers cutting the price of labor below the point of subsistence, just as the Trust prevents capitalists selling their capital below cost. In both cases the premise is that there is a demand. If there is no demand for labor, the trade unions naturally cannot protect the laborer. On the other hand, when there is no demand for capital for the production of commodities be- cause of a "glutted market," there is no reason why there should be any Trust among capitalists to prevent too much capital going into that industry. The crisis just now impending in this country cannot be averted by the action of either of the trade unions or the trusts. They are equally helpless before the situation which arises from non-demand for their respective commodities. Some people have argued that the trusts, by regulating the production of commodities, can institute some sort of in- dustrial feudalism which will result in the permanence of the existing competitive system. There is no doubt at all that the existing trusts, by virtue of their monopoly, have been able to make much greater profits than they would have made under competition, and to a certain very limited extent they have divided these profits among their respective em- ployees by the payment of somewhat higher wages. This Mr. Gompers And His Little Plan 147 sop, though small, had something to do with the Federation's declaration against anti-Trust legislation, in which it was set forth that such legislation would be turned against the trade unions rather than against the capitalists. And although there is some truth in this allegation, it is also true that the trade unions themselves feel so lewhat kindly toward the Trust form of industry, which has enabled them to get higher wages than could possibly have fallen to them other- wise. The employer when he reduces wages invariably ex- cuses himself to his workmen by declaring that he is re- luctantly forced to it by the lowering of prices. The Trust, by being the only employer, might oppress labor, but so far it has not exercised its power that way, and trade unionists are apparently grateful for the favor they have received. The adoption of these resolutions by the Federation of Labor is more or less tangible evidence of this fact. Furthermore, the recent disclosures ventilated in McClures Magazine about the combination of the trade unionists and the Trust of the Coal Dealers in Chicago, by which the latter raised the price of coal, and then, through their tre- mendous profits, were enabled to pay higher prices for union labor, is still fresh in our memories, and is a concrete example of what Mr. Gompers is grateful for. With a constantly growing demand for commodities the Trust could hold a monopoly price upon sales, and if they were entrenched still further in their monopoly by an alliance with the trade unions, and in return for this alliance gave higher wages, then, indeed, we would be in danger of the so-called "in- dustrial feudalism." But it is not owing to the reluctance of the capitalists or of the trade unionists that such a system of industry may not some day be imposed upon us. That there is no danger of this fate befalling us is owing to the fact that such a state of affairs would be an economic im- possibility. Of this the existing industrial situation alone is sufficient evidence. Here we have the Steel Trust with their market flooded with steel products, because the capitalists who have been building steel buildings and laying steel rail find that there is no longer any chance of profitable extension of their business. Therefore they don't buy steel, and the steel mills don't make it, and the Steel Trust cannot employ men. So 148 Socialism Inevitable that even if the Steel Trust were willing to pay the highest wages demanded, it could not do so, for the same reason that it could not pay even the lowest wages, namely, because it could not sell its product. Hence, any combination between the Steel Trust and its employees must finally fall to the ground as soon as the market for steel collapses; and such is the case to-day. Thus we see that we could have an industrial feudalism only by the total elimination of competition among the capitalists, as well as among the laborers, and not only in our own nation, but throughout the whole world. It must be remembered that there is one great class of competitors whom no union can ever save from competition, and that is the farmers. The farmer is shown by actual statistics to get less return from his farm than the average wage-worker gets from his labor. As a matter of fact, he is really engaged in selling his labor, just as much as the wage- worker is, the difference being that he doesn't, like the latter, sell it directly to the capitalist. The wheat farmers of the world are engaged in competition, one against the other, in the sale of their wheat, Liverpool fixing the price which is determined by the cost of production at the margin of cultivation. Now the great majority of farmers are working at approximately this margin of cultivation, and are hence compelled to work for a mere subsistence wage like city laborers. The fact that the farmer gets paid for his wheat instead of for his labor does not alter the fact that he is really paid a competitive wage, just as much as is the day laborer. Now, with the farming class ground down to the verge of mere subsistence through competition in the sale of their products, it is at once evident that they cannot get enough for these products to avoid overproduction, unless a world- union of farmers can be found to hold up the price, which, on the face of it, is an impossibility. And it is not only the farmers who are cutting their own throats by competition. There is an immense body of small middle-class men, merchants, etc., who, in the same way are also selling their services for a mere subsistence. Then, of course, there are hundreds of thousands of laborers who can never be organized into a trade union and are also earning Mr. Gompers And His Little Plan 149 the barest living. Practically the only people who can be raised above this condition are the present members of the trade unions, who constitute only about one-ninth of the wage-workers of the United States. And even with the trade unionists, their own estimate of what they should have is so very low, being only a few cents a day above a subsistence wage, that even if all the organized workers got trade union wages it would have little effect in relieving the glutted market of the world. Lastly, we have not taken into consideration the compe- tition of those capitalists who are unable to enter into a Trust and have the price of their products lowered by competition exactly as are those of the farmer. That is, the capitalist himself lowers his prices in the struggle for a market. This theory of an industrial feudalism is one of the wildest and most ridiculous ideas that has ever originated in the mind of man ; but, luckily, outside of a few dreamy Socialists of the half-baked variety, who are so far removed from the actual affairs of this world, that what they think is of no importance, it is held by no one. Another idea that is being suggested in this connection is equally absurd. It is that the capitalists when they see a period of depression coming on, and find that they cannot utilize labor in productive enterprises, will transfer it from productive occupations and use it to create luxuries. To speak concretely: If Mr. Schwab, who is a large holder of Steel Trust stock, finds that there is a decline in the demand for steel, and that he cannot employ laborers to make more, he will take five thousand men away from the steel mills and set them to work raising roses in his garden. The absurdity of this is at once evident when it is re- membered that when overproduction of steel exhibits itself it means that a much lower price will be paid for steel. This means a tremendous falling off in the profits of the Steel Trust, and naturally a great diminution of Mr. Schwab's in- come. It may be that his income may sink to practically nothing, if all his capital is invested in the Steel Trust. So that these Utopian dreamers would argue that the moment Schwab's income sinks to zero, it will be the signal for him to employ thousands of men in growing roses, merely to 150 Socialism Inevitable keep them employed. Just when Mr. Schwab would naturally economize he is to splurge. Further analysis of this ridiculous suggestion is quite unnecessary. It is even more absurd than Mr. Gompers' idea of the capitalists keeping up high wages on a falling market. There is no future for this country except through Socialism, and there is no possibility of benevolent feudalism, or any other thing, side-tracking the irresistible movement of human- ity to its inevitable goal. Ameeica Suffocating With Wealth 151 AMERICA SUFFOCATING WITH WEALTH (February, 1904.) THE particular mission that this magazine has taken upon itself is to show the people of the United States that their ability to produce has so far outrun their capacity to consume, under the limitations of the existing wage system, that there is necessarily piling up a huge mass of unconsumed products which will soon cause a cry of "overproduction." This will be followed by a tremendous fall in prices, accompanied by a terrible unemployed problem. "We cannot employ men to make unsalable goods," will be the plaint of the employers. We present innumerable facts to support this contention, but the most ominous one of all is the blindness of the American public in failing to see the significance of present conditions. And when we say the American public we wish it to be understood that we include every class, and those of every belief, economic, social, and religious. It might be thought by some that inasmuch as we are proposing Socialism as the remedy for this impending calam- ity, that all Socialists, or at any rate a great part of theni, share with us our belief in the imminence of the collapse-of our existing industrial and financial structure. This, we reluctantly confess, is not the case. The vast majority of the Socialists, so far as we can ascertain, no more believe in the imminence of any unprecedented industrial crisis than do the general public. The Socialist theory, as delineated by Marx, it is true, compels them to a pious belief that at some old day and at some old time or other we will necessarily face such a crisis, but that it is really now at hand there are few Socialists to admit. If Gabriel should blow his trumpet to-day most men would say, "Hear that big megaphone !" We speak of this merely to show that a belief in the theory of Socialism derived from the study of books 152 Socialism Inevitable written fifty years ago, unless fortified by understanding^ reading the facts of to-day, is of little value to a man in in- terpreting current economic events and their bearing upon the Socialist movement. ' The people of the United States seem about to plunge into the greatest crisis known in the history of man with prac- tically no warning, not even from those whose object in life should be to give warning* In proof of which we submit a short resume of the last U. S. census report : The population in 1903 is estimated at 80,372,000, against 23,- 191,876 in 1850, and 5,308,483 in 1800. The wealth of the country is placed at $94,000,000,000 in 1900, and it is declared that $100,- 000,000,000 would not be an unreasonable estimate for 1903, whereas for 1850 the wealth of the country stood at $7,000,000,000. The per capita wealth is set down at $1,235 in 1900, and $307 in 1850, having thus more than quadrupled. The interest-bearing debt in 1903 is $914,000,000, against $1,724,000,000 in 1880, and $2,046,000,000 in 1870. Thus the per capita indebtedness of the country in 1903 is $11.51, against $60.46 in 1870. Gold and gold certificates in circulation in 1903 for the first time exceeded $1,000,000,000, or, to be exact, $1,031,000,000, against $810,000,000 in 1900 and $232,000,000 in 1880. The total money in circulation in 1903 was $2,367,000,000, against $1,429,000,000 in 1890, $973,000,000 in 1880, $675,000,000 in 1870, and $435,000,000 in 1860. Deposits in savings banks in 1903 were $2,935,000,000, against $1,524,000,000 in 1890, $550,000,000 in 1870, and $149,- 000,000 in 1860. The value of manufactures for the census year 1900 is given at $13,000,000,000, against $5,333,000,000 in 1880, and less than $2,000,000,000 in 1860. Railways in operation in 1902 had 203,132 miles of track, against 166,703 in 1890; 93,262 in 1880, 52,922 in 1870, 30,626 in 1860, and 9,021 in 1850. Coal production increased in nine years from 162,814,977 tons in 1893 to 269,081,049 in 1902. Steel shows the remarkable in- crease from 4,019,995 tons in 1893 to 14,947,250 tons in 1902, while exported manufactures, in the same nine years, increased from $158,023,118 to $407,526,159, and the total imports from $866,400,- 922 to $1,025,719,237. The excess of total exports over total imports in 1903 was $394,422,442, while in 1893 it stood at $18,735,728. How anyone, after reading these figures, particularly those comparing 1890 with 1900, can fail to see the overwhelming support that they give to our argument we cannot understand. In 1893 we were in the depths of despair from an economic America Suffocating With Wealth 153 standpoint. We seemed to have built everything that was to be built and there was no employment for either labor or capital. The figures show us how much we were mistaken when we compare 1900 with 1890 and notice the enormous amount of capital that has found its way into almost every conceivable trade channel from banking to railways. Some might say that if it is admitted that in 1893 we were mistaken in thinking capital could not be consumed, then may we not be equally mistaken in 1904. We answer that the conditions are different. In the first place the tre- mendous augmentation of our capital which has occurred in the last ten years affords a great bar to additional capital being similarly consumed. The trusts are the tangible evidence of this. The Trust is the sign of overproduction. That there will be some capital used, that there will even be immense sums used, we do not for a moment deny, but that there will be enough capital consumed adequately to employ the labor of this country we absolutely refuse to believe, unless a great European war intervenes. Barring a great war nothing can keep our capitalist system alive for another ten years. In order for capitalism to live men must die as they have died in the past in the fetid sweat shop, in the deadly dust of the cotton mill, and in the poison of the lead factories. Men have long been dying of starvation from unemployment as well; but all the slaughter of the past is nothing to what will be necessary for the future if capitalism is to have a longer lease of life, and even with all the slaughtering we shall find the task in vain, for Socialism is bound to come in any event. Let no one think we are referring to any slaughter resulting from an attempt to force the change. We do not expect anything of the sort. It will be unnecessary and im- possible. The slaughtering of men on our railways, and of women and children in our bake-oven Chicago theatres, let alone the slaughter of war, is quite enough. The next great upward move of humanity must not, and shall not, be begun by a sacrifice of life. If anyone wishes to do any sacrificing, let him begin on himself. But why talk about "sacrifice" either of life or of happi- ness? What we propose is just the opposite. Here is a vast nation the United States proved by every form of statistics 154 Socialism Inevitable to be rich beyond measure in everything that makes for health, happiness and life. The wealth is the Nation's. We are the Nation. Ergo : let us have what is ours. Let the Nation Own the Trusts, and "we" will own the trusts. Then "we" will be happy, for we will have abolished the great cause of unhappiness poverty. Wall Street Journal Turns Moralist 155 WALL ST. JOURNAL TURNS MORALIST (February, 1904.) I BELIEVE in playing a fair game or not playing at all. If you enter into a contest, having agreed beforehand upon the rules of play, and then find yourself getting beaten, you will stick by the agreement and take your medicine that is, if you have any sand. You must either do that or play the baby act and ask for a modification of the rules to fit your special case. If you want to play, stick to the rules ; if you do not want to play say so, or ask for a new deal and a new set of rules. Now we Americans entered a long time ago upon a game of competition in money-making. We established certain rules at the beginning, and now that Kockefeller and Morgan are beating us, have no right to whine and at the same time insist on the continuance of the game. The general rule was competition to a finish ; let the best man win. The fellow who could quote the lowest price should have the market; let" bankruptcy engulf the high-price man. Now I, myself, am perfectly consistent in my attitude. Let others be the same. I say that Kockefeller and Morgan and Gates and Hill, with their immense bank accounts, can get away with us poor small fry in this competitive game, and that I, for one, have had enough of it. I am licked, I confess it ; and I have sense enough to throw up the sponge. I call for a new deal and new rules. I want the earth made subject to a re-division, and I wish rules made that will for- ever prevent its ownership passing out of the hands of the people. I say that when the government owns the capital of this country just as it now owns our national parks and our post office, then will be established a permanent equality of wealth ; and never until this is done will men be content. Now if we should try to think of some one person who is satisfied with the existing order of things and upon whose lips is the cry: "Let well enough alone; stand pat," we 156 Socialism Inevitable would most likely have thought of the editor of the Wall Street Journal. But if we did, we certainly have another think coming, for this is the cry-baby talk I find in this morning's (Dec. 16) editorial : BUSINESS AND THE LAW. We observe that several papers which have reprinted and commented upon the little anecdote printed in this column some time ago, dealing with two factories and the method by which a capitalist proposed to acquire the prosperous factory, have ap- parently misunderstood the general drift of our remarks there- upon. We printed the story mainly to point out that the law permitted the doing of a great many things in the way of busi- ness, which were, in a moral sense, nothing better than highway robbery. We did not, as one or two of our more ingenuous, if hasty, commentators assumed, at all venture to justify such acts. To speak plainly, we see no essential difference between the taking of a competitor's business away from him by extreme competition, that is, by competition not warranted on any other motive, and the forcible abstraction of portable property from one man by another man stronger than himself. We do not regard it as morally defensible, for example, for a man to establish himself alongside someone else and proceed to take away the business of that someone else, using for that purpose the brute force of money spent in selling at a loss, any more than we should regard it as morally defensible for him to accomplish the same purpose by brute force of arms. The purpose is immoral. It involves the taking away of that which belongs to someone else by other than fair competition. Of course, such a process is as common as can be in the business world, and is perfectly legal. The Standard Oil Company was charged with this kind of thing at practically all stages of its existence. Apparently no Standard Oil representative has ever felt it necessary to deny the charge. The fact of the matter is that the conventions of the business world, expressed in the law, have simply replaced the exercise of mere brute force, leaving the article of the decalogue against stealing expressed only so far as the stealing is accomplished by actual physical force or by absolute fraud. Beyond this the moral law finds no expression in the law of business. Now, I have often read this kind of tommy-rot before, usually in such periodicals as the Christian Herald or the War Cry, but to find it in the Wall Street Journal is too funny for words. The Journal believes in competition all right, so long as you do not compete to the extent of taking away the other fellows' business by selling below cost. He wants a fight, but insists on no broken heads. Wall Street Journal Turns Moralist 157 Pray, what right has the Journal to tell me how I am to spend my money and what my selling price is to be? And besides, how is it to determine what my "cost" is? I may be selling at a price which renders me a profit, but which would mean a loss to my competitor. I may have a superior process ; I may control the sources of supply ; I may own my own property while he must pay rent; I may have a much bigger plant ; and so, simply because I have more money and can afford to sell for less, I capture my competitor's business. Now, why do I have a bigger capital? Why^ in fact, do I have any capital at all? Do I own capital for the purpose of fulfilling the moral law ? Not at all. I own it that I may make money, and for that purpose only. It is true that it is not so very many years since men were wont to think of the moral law and the business law as much the same thing. It is a comparatively modern view, this of the Wall Street Journal, that a man who, by reason of superior capital, cripples or ruins another is morally in the same class as a highwayman, though financially eligible to be a member of young Mr. Rockefeller's Bible Class. If we are to have private capital and competition, then let us have it and play the game according to rule. Let the big man devour the little man; he has a right to his prey. It's too late altogether for the Wall Street Journal, speaking for the smaller capitalists who are being driven to cover by the superior capital of Rockefeller, to cry "quarter." There is no quarter. It is war to the knife, and the knife to the hilt. There can be no quarter under capitalism and competition, and I ask for none. I demand justice, which can come only with Socialism. 158 Socialism Inevitable WALLACE'S GREAT BOOK (February, 1904.) I suppose there are many who have gone through the same evolution of thought as myself. Born and raised in an orthodox family, which held firmly to the Mosaic account of creation and the anthropomorphic conception of a deity, I not only threw off such superstitions, but, as is natural, came to regard everything along the line of conventional religious belief as absurd and unworthy of reverence. I think this is the course that most Socialists have gone through. First we discard our orthodox belief in religion, and then, in time, our no less orthodox views in economics. Nevertheless, strange as it may seem, the more a man studies Socialism the more he comes to understand and sympathize with many orthodox religious ideas that at an early period in the evolution of his thought he had scorned. For instance, he finds men talking the Golden Eule- and practising Cut Your Neighbor's Throat; and when he learns that the practice is necessary to preserve existence, while the theory means suicide, he says that this preaching a rule that can never be practised is the limit of absurdity. Later on, however, he becomes a Socialist and finds that the theory would work all right if we only had a socialistic world to practice it in. Then, when he feels that we should have such a world, and that eventually we must have such a world, he begins to have more respect for the Golden Eule. Before he understands Socialism, moreover, he scoffs at the idea of thanking God for daily bread, which he doesn't get ; but later on he sees that it is man's fault and not God's that he goes hungry, and understands that he, himself, is one of the very men who have been supporting the system which makes men go hungry when God has done his part in pro- viding plenty for all. And so, from day to day, he gets to realize that after all Wallace's Great Book 159 there is a much better basis for certain religious- theories than he had at one time thought possiBI eralthough he also knows that the reason for his increasing respect tor such theories does not in the least justify blind believers in religious dogma. One of the chief tenets of most religions is that our planet is the centre of the universe, that the sun revolves around it, and that the moon and stars are simply created to light it up and make the heavens more beautiful for the edification and enjoyment of the greatest thing ever created, Man. In short, that it was all done for man, and that man is the image of God, and the next thing to divinity itself. The early astronomical discoveries in the Middle Ages, however, so upset conventional beliefs of this kind that as- tronomers, such as Galileo, had a most difficult time of it with the Church when they announced that it is the earth that moves around the sun. Time passed; discovery after dis- covery was made ; and instead of the Earth being the centre of things, about which all else revolved, it was found to be simply a grain of sand in a universe of apparently infinite matter, and not to be compared in size with many of the planets in our own solatf system, while in comparison with the sun it is about as a pea to an orange. And then, when we found that the fixed stars were millions in number, and nearly all larger than our own sun, we natur- ally jumped to the conclusion that these other suns must have systems of planets of their own; and that, therefore, there are millions and millions of planets like the Earth, all quite as suitable for human life, and most likely supporting life, or otherwise why should they have been created ? The next step in reasoning from the "most likely" was to the "without doubt," and from that to the 'unquestionably" was a small step. And all these steps were much the more easily taken by men like myself who I confess it to my shame were naturally disposed to adopt any theory that would still further discredit the orthodox religious view that the earth is the centre of things and that man is the only creature worth while upon the earth. It has been so long since I have taken much interest in religious matters, if I ever did take an interest, that when 160 Socialism Inevitable a book* like Wallace's comes along and tends to upset all my old ideas upon the subject of "Other Worlds Than Ours" it is naturally of intense interest to me. Dr. Wallace's conclusions are: (1) The stellar universe forms one collective whole, and, though of enormous extent, is yet finite, its extent being determinable. (2) The solar system is situated in the plane of the Milky Way, and not far removed from the centre of that plane. (3) The uni- verse throughout consists of the same kind of matter, and is subject to the same physical and chemical laws. These are the first three conclusions he arrives at, but he adds three others which seem favored by the highest probability. These are: (4) The only planet in our solar system inhabited or inhabitable is the Earth. (5) The probabilities are almost as great against any other sun possessing inhabited planets. (6) The nearly central position of our sun is prob- ably a permanent one, and has been specially favorable perhaps absolutely essential to life-development on the earth. His first proposition, that the universe is finite, and not infinite as is generally held, is of the greatest interest and importance. The theory of a finite universe is in line with Socialist philosophy, which regards the human race as an organism, and likewise with my own particular theory that the universe itself is an organism. For it is manifestly in- congruous to think of a thing as an .organism, and at the same time being infinite; and if the stenar^aniverse is one collective whole then it must be finite. When a little child looks out on the Earth he at first regards it as infinite and unrelated: only with increasing age and understanding can he ever realize that it is finite and organized. Thus when Eockefeller as a lad went into the oil business it seemed to him that there was infinite scope for expansion. That the business would ever be so organized and extended as to embrace the entire earth, was quite beyond the wildest of his speculations, and yet it has all occurred within his own lifetime, and due largely to his own exertion. The logic of events was his best instructor in the philosophy of the oil Man's Place in the Universe: A Study of the Results of Scientific Research in Relation to the Unity or Plurality of Worlds. By Alfred R. Wallace, L.L.D., D.C.L., F.R.S., etc. Wallace's Great Book 161 business. And just as the oil business extended its conscious organization so have other businesses extended theirs, until to-day it is only one of many branches of trade that are on the road to a worldwide sphere of operation. Now it is apparent that Mr. Rockefeller can never have complete knowledge and control of the oil business until he has accomplished a world organization. To know it he must know its limitations. Similarly we cannot understand the universe unless we know its limitations. To me this Wallace theory of a fini te universe must be true because it accords with my deepest philosophy of life. If the universe is infinite and, therefore, unorganized, then there would be no motive that is, no valid fundamental motive for men to work for Socialism, or in fact, even to desire to live. For of what use is Socialism if it is simply to make this world a better place for men to live in and nothing more? Upon such a theory of life we might be compared to intelligent cattle preparing a more comfortable stable for ourselves. Suppose we do introduce Socialism and abolish poverty ? This can be done easily enough, but why should we wish to do it? It is no answer to say that we do it to increase the stock of human happiness, for then I would ask why should anyone wish to increase human happiness? The reason one wishes to increase human happiness is fundamentally a self- ish one: it is to increase his own happiness by becoming a cell in a healthier organization of human society than that which now exists. If one of your fingers is crushed, the injured cells are not more anxious to become well again than the uninjured cells in your other fingers are to have them well. There is no single uninjured cell in your whole body that is less inter- ested in having the injured cells made whole than if it were itself injured. Now, why is this? Simply that the body is an organism, and a very self-conscious organism. It knows that for the whole to be well, the parts must be well. There are some insects which are organized well enough physically, but whose nerve centres are so badly correlated that they have little or no consciousness of any injury to themselves. Some wasps, for instance, may be beheaded and the head will go on unconcernedly taking food. Really to live, a body must not c 162 Socialism Inevitable only be organized but also conscious of its organism. As individual men we are simply cells in the greater organism, human society, and only as we feel this do we tend to realize the highest life. It is impossible for any single cell in an undeveloped organism to realize itself, by its own will alone. It can do so only through the development of the entire organism. I may wish to send a telegram from New York to Boston, but the mere wish is not enough to accomplish the act. Wires must be laid, the instruments connected and men must be ready to co-operate in the work before the message can go. However, if I never had the wish to send any message, and if no one else ever had, there would never have been any telegraph wires laid. Therefore, to realize my desire I must have first the wish, and then an organism that I can use to consummate that wish. Man as a unit is nothing. It is only as he is useful to the whole that he lives. And only as he is useful is he happy. Again, he cannot be of much use if the whole be badly organized. I may have a perfect foot, but if my leg is broken the foot is of little use, and so, indeed, is my whole body. I may be a perfect man, but if society is so badly organized that I am not fed, then I am of no more use to society than if I did not exist, just as the perfect foot would be useless to the body if the blood did not flow to nourish it. The foot, to support the body, must first be supported by the body. All this is axiomatic and has been said, and better said, many times before; but that the individual is a cell in human society is more quickly recognized than that society is merely a cell in a much greater organism, that of the universe itself. We are the result of evolutionary development in adapting ourselves to our environment. That we have taught our- selves to live on the land instead of in the water is one of the commonplaces of evolution, and it is quite obvious that we are now land animals and need land to live upon. That we have temporarily given up our title to land to a small class of people called landlords is beside the mark. We will take it back whenever we really want it. However, that we must have land, I say, is obvious, and it is likewise obvious that we must have air. And, more than that, as Professor Wallace points out, we must have the small amount of carbonic acid gas that is in the air. If it were not there plants could not Wallace's Great Book 163 live, and if there were no plants there would be no food for animals. Wallace goes on pointing out one thing after another in our physical universe that is necessary to our existence, things we ourselves hardly think of at all. For instance, he shows the atmospheric dust to be absolutely necessary to life, for otherwise there would be no clouds, and without clouds we would be in all kinds of a muss, for the details of which I must refer the curious to the book itself. And not only is the atmospheric dust a good thing physically, but to it we likewise owe the blue of our skies. And here it may be remarked that not only is the material universe necessary to us physically, but it also has an aesthetic and spiritual value of perhaps no less vital importance. Suppose you were fed properly, and had all the physical necessities of life, but were told that you and all humanity would forever be denied any contact whatsoever with a material universe? That you would never see the sea, nor the mountains, nor birds, nor animals, nor flowers, nor stars, nor moon, nor sun; how would such a prospect strike you? You would be likely to feel that you might as well be dead. Or suppose you were to suffer a painless amputation of the various members of your body. First you lose a hand, then a foot, then an ear, and so on until "you" are finally reduced to a trunkless head; would you consider life worth living ? i Professor Wallace suggests that it is quite possible that the remotest star is just as necessary to our physical life as is the minute quantity of carbonic acid gas in our atmosphere. He puts the suggestion purely upon the physical basis, how- ever, whereas I extend the possibility to the star's being not only a physical but a spiritual necessity. Indeed, is it not even possible the spiritual and physical are the same? It seems to me that the only sane hypothesis of life is that each individual life is dependent upon the universe for its existence, and that we have no right to suppose the slightest grain of matter could be lost from the remotest star without its having a profound effect upon all life, upon the spiritual as well as upon the physical basis of life. And just as we can- not imagine any adequate life for the individual cells in our body unless that body itself be alive, and alive spiritually as well as mentally and physically, so we are wrong in think- 164: Socialism Inevitable ing it possible for the individual man to be really alive unless human society also is alive and conscious. Moreover, just to the extent that man is conscious of being a part of society, and society is conscious that each and every man is a part of it, to that extent does the life of man increase. The greatest capacity for life would exist in a man de- veloped to the highest degrw~s^ri^imM^mentally and physic- ally, and living in a self-conscious 'society having the most perfect command of- and knowledge of itself, and of its own relation to the universe. This takes us back to the original premise, namely that the universe must be finite if it is an organism, and it must be an organism, otherwise man would lose his motive to live. That is, there would be no man. Man lives in order to unite himself as a harmonious chord to a harmonious society. He lives that one day he may hear the morning stars sing, and that he may sing in unison with them. He lives that he may be one of the pipes in the organ of the universe, and he lives that he may play that organ. In the day to come man will feel himself not only a part of a conscious society but of a conscious universe, and the universe will feel that each man is a part of it. Socialism as a movement towards the har- monious organization of human society is, then, but one step toward the greatest of all ends the harmonious organization of the universe. But I have dwelt so long upon the first proposition that I have given myself little space for the others. His second proposition is somewhat analogous to his sixth, and depends upon the acceptance of the first. If the Earth is near the centre of the universe, then we must first conceive of the universe as finite, for it is not possible that infinity could have a centre. Where there are no bounds, there can be no centre. In Wallace's theory the Earth is at the approximate centre of the universe; and he supports it with the dicta of most of the heavyweights among the astronomers. In fact, throughout the whole book he disarms the criticism that he is no astronomer by frankly admitting the fact, and explaining that whatever he may state upon such subjects in corrobora- tion of his views he invariably quotes from astronomers whose reputation gives them a right to be considered. Notwith- standing all his care, however, the critics who disagree with Wallace's Great Book 165 his conclusions, have quite ignored his authorities for his astronomical statements, and taken them as originating with the author himself. Wallace's fourth proposition that the Earth is the only planet in our solar system that is habitable is easy of demon- stration. This, in fact, is now accepted by practically all astronomers with the exception of my friend Professor Lowell, who clings tenaciously to his theory that Mars is inhabited. Its small size, it being but one-ninth the size of the Earth, means, however, that the atmosphere, if Mars has any at all other than carbonic acid gas, must be so rare that the planet cannot retain its heat by night, and, therefore, its surface temperature, during the greater part of the twenty- four hours, is below the freezing point, which of course, would hardly be favorable to life. Wallace further points out by what a set of curious coin- cidences the Earth is habitable for man, and that none of these conditions exist on the other solar planets, and, moreover, are very unlikely to exist upon the planets, if any such exist, of the other solar systems. All this is so contrary to the ideas of modern men of science that there has naturally been raised a wail of protest that is more pathetic than convincing. I can say that I, for one, approached Wallace's book with a strong belief in the theory that there were very likely millions of worlds all about as suitable for a man as is the Earth, and that it was more than likely that several millions of these worlds were inhabited by beings not only equal to man but probably very much higher in development, physically and mentally. Wallace, however, has convinced me that I was wrong; and I know of nothing more stimulating to the intellect than to run across a book that upsets all one's pre- conceived ideas. Wallace is the most distinguished scientist of the age; he is the co-discoverer with Darwin of the theory of the origin of species, and it is only through his great modesty that he is not so well known in that connection as is Darwin. He is an avowed Socialist, and one of the most delightful and lovable men it has ever been my privilege to meet. 166 Socialism Inevitable HERBERT SPENCER (February, 1904.) WE are all too apt to think, when a man does not agree with us, that the difference of opinion rests upon other than straightforward reasons. That this is a fault to which we Socialists are prone is readily admitted. But we have more cause to be suspicious than most people. It is not to the interest of a man of property or position to agree with us, and since the economic basis of Socialism is so plain and simple we have a good reason to question either the brains or the honesty of a man who disagrees with us. Suppose you claim the right and title to four apples, and four only. Now suppose that by actual count I show you that you really possess five apples. I then say you have an apple to which you have no right; whereupon, if you say, you fail to understand either my mathematics or my ethics, I can justly reply by questioning your sanity, or if not your sanity your honesty. Now, Socialism to a Socialist is like unto this problem of the four apples in its simplicity, and it is always hard for us to understand that it is not just as plain to others as it is to us. Thus Herbert Spencer has always been a conundrum to the Socialist. Here was a man, one of the foremost thinkers of the day, who bowed the knee neither to priest, millionaire nor king ; a man who preceded Darwin in his adherence to the" theory of evolution, and who at one time was heading straight for Socialism. Spencer was apparently logically bound to apply his theory of social evolution to the social organization of man as well as to his individual organization. If man was developing, then so was society. He had said that the "cardinal trait in all advancing organizations is the development of the regu- lative apparatus ;" but when the Trust appeared as the great regulator of industry, and a fulfilment of his prophecy, he refused to recognize it as such, and persisted in looking at Spencer, Herbert 167 it through the blind and prejudiced eyes of an American politician. He called the Trust an unnatural phenomenon which should be suppressed by the police powers of the State. Then whereas some fifty years ago he had gone so far aa to demand the nationalization of land as a necessary concom- itant of his theories of exact and equal justice, he later on recanted, lamely excusing himself by saying that it was "simpler" to leave the existing owners in possession than to take the trouble of expropriating them. Of course, in a way, he was right. That is, if we are to leave all private capital, except land, in the hands of private owners, and continue with our present competitive system, it is hardly worth while to upset things for the little good that land nationalization would do. But by leaving things as they are we give up all our ideas of exact justice, and for a man with the high ethical standard held by Herbert Spencer his recantation was incongruous and inexplicable. The man was a great disappointment ; but this is not saying that he has not performed a great and monumental work for humanity. He made many good bricks, and even if they do not go to construct the building he designed, they have come into good use in constructing the Socialist edifice. 168 Socialism Inevitable THE "RIGHT TO WORK" (March, 1904.) ON no subject has there been delivered quite so much flapdoodle as on the so-called "right to work." The last notable deliverance on the subject was that of Jas. M. Beck, ex-Assistant Attorney General of the United States, at the annual dinner of the Holland Society in New York. Mr. Beck, in the course of his speech, thus unbur- dened himself: If I do not misread history, the prosperity of the Dutch people was founded upon a principle which is vitally essential to the progress and happiness of any people, and that is the inalienable right of every man to work for whom he pleases and at what wage he pleases, and to enjoy freely the fruit of his toil. This principle is in some need of vindication in this country and at this hour. Man was brought into the world to work. It is not only his burden, it is his right, and any form of social tyranny which contravenes this right is infinitely mischievous. In vain are written constitutions, with their paper guarantee of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, if the right of the humblest citizen to earn his bread in the sweat of his brow is thus denied. Mr. Beck reveals the same queer mental twist that in- variably characterizes the Trust attorney, or such others as are moved to "bend the pregnant hinges of the knee, that thrift may follow fawning." There is no record that any of these twisted reasoners have answered the question, why, if it is "the inalienable right of every man to work for whom he pleases and at what wage he pleases," is the constantly in- creasing army of unemployed forced to go hungry for lack of opportunity to exercise this "inalienable right"? As Mr. Beck, and those like him, interpret the doctrine of the "in- alienable right to work," the theory is sheer nonsense, and simply a perversion of the theoretically admitted right of every man to life, which, of course, he cannot enjoy without work. Mr. Beck, and those of his kind seem to be very in- dignant when they talk about somebody being denied the The "Right to Work" 169 right to work, but of course all their clamor is simply due to the fact that they want unrestricted competition in the labor market. They don't want any labor organization trying to control it, since this would mean that Mr. Beck or his employers would have to pay higher wages, whereas if the power of the labor unions were crushed, the capitalists could get labor on their own terms and conditions. There we have the milk in the cocoanut. 170 Socialism Inevitable WILSHIRE'S EXILE TO END (April, 1904.) WILSHIKE'S MAGAZINE is edited in New York but published in Canada. This anomaly, however, is going to end, as we have just received the gra- cious intimation from His Imperial Highness, President Eoosevelt, conveyed through his Third Assistant Postmaster General, Mr. Madden, that he has decided, in his infinite wisdom and goodness, to allow me to print again in New York. If s very good of the Strenuous One to allow a Socialist devil like Wilshire to ink his editorial sheets in the same city where he thinks his thinks, but that the approaching November elec- tion has had anything to do with this awakening of his con- science is, of course, not to be mentioned. The President had to have time to consider, that's all. Now, although I do not wish to weary my readers with my tale of woe, it will be necessary to give a brief outline for the benefit of those who desire to know the facts. Let the others be patient while I groan. In December, 1900, I began to publish this magazine or rather its weekly predecessor, The Challenge in Los Angeles, but as things soon began to boom, I decided that New York would be a better field from which to enlighten the dear public. Accordingly I moved my printing office from Los Angeles and issued the first number in New York in Sep- tember, 1901. I had, of course, secured second class mailing rates in California, and took for granted that there would be no difficulty in getting the necessary transfer. Indeed I think this would readily have been issued had it not been for the unfortunate assassination of President McKinley, which occurred the very week in which my application was made. This may have been simply a coincidence, but if so, it was a very remarkable one, for a hue and cry had arisen throughout the nation that this crime was the result of the pernicious teaching of the Socialists and Anarchists, and that Wilshire's Exile to End 171 all papers advocating such doctrines should be suppressed. At that time a good many people did not distinguish between Socialism and Anarchism, and it looked to me as if the post- office thought that it would be a good opportunity to injure the cause of Socialism by suppressing this, a Socialist maga- zine. Anyway, they refused the transfer. The postoffice authorities have always denied such a motive. They claim that the paper was suppressed not on account of its Socialistic views, but because of its Wilshire views. Its views, in fact, were so Wilshiresque that the magazine in their eyes was simply an advertising circular for the spread of Wilshire ideas, and, as such, had no right to newspaper postal rates but must pay "advertising circular" rates. When I say "suppressed" a word of explanation is neces- sary. The paper was not actually suppressed, but its rate of postage was raised from one cent a pound to eight cents a pound, which was really equivalent to suppression, inasmuch as the postage cost at the eight-cent rate was practically pro- hibitory. I tried to have the decision reversed, but all effort was unavailing. I appealed to the President. He refused either to see me or to take up my case, and my letters to him com- plaining of Mr. Madden's act were turned over to Mr. Madden himself to answer. This was probably as insulting a way of denying a citizen the right of petition as even strenuosity could devise. I next went to the United States Courts, but obtaining justice that way is too long-winded a procedure for a monthly magazine. Indeed, my case is yet pending, hav- ing never even come to trial. After thus exhausting every device I could think of, I finally appealed to the Postmaster General of Canada, and asked him if he would give me second class entry there. He promptly decided that Wilshire's Magazine was eligible to entry, even when I carefully explained to him that Mr. Madden had declared it to be merely a circular to advertise Wilshire's ideas. However, the Canadian law requires that a periodical taking advantage of second class entry at the Canadian postoffice must be printed in Canada. So I hied myself across the border and issued my first Canadian num- ber in January, 1902. My editorial and publishing offices 172 Socialism Inevitable remain in New York, but the printing and mailing are yet done in Toronto. I might mention that just prior to my going to Canada a certain Mr. Harrison J. Barrett, an attorney of Baltimore a nephew of Judge Tyner, the recently deposed Attorney General of the postoffice offered to take up the case and obtain my entry in New York for the modest fee of $5,000. Mr. Barrett, I may add, has since been disbarred for connec- tion with the postoffice frauds. I declined to be bled, how- ever, and for more than two years have had the unique distinction of thinking in New York and printing my thinks in Canada. All this time, of course, I have been trying to get back, but hitherto without success. Although I called the attention of all the Congressmen to the matter, never a one budged to help me. My plea was made upon the general ground of the freedom of the press, but that was simply a question of principle, and who bothers about principles these days ? Then I found the right path : I tried business. A certain printer in New York, not knowing of my enforced exile, came to me and solicited the job of printing the magazine. I said I would be glad to consider his bid if he could arrange that the New York postoffice would allow me second class entry. Mr. Printer promptly wrote to Senator Tom Piatt of New York. He complained of the gross injustice done to the printing trade of New York in forcing me to give out work to Canada which should be kept at home. Could Senator Piatt not rectify such an outrage? "Well, I guess I can," said the Senator. "What am I here for except to look after my constituents and see that they can have every opportunity to make a living?" That was all. In short order I had a most polite letter from Mr. Madden saying that anything he could do for me to help me back to New York would be done instanter. As a preliminary he granted me the right of "foreign entry," which means that he has decided that the magazine is all right as now printed in a foreign country Canada and is a tacit admission from him that if it is printed in New York I will be granted entry there. So good-by, dear Canada. I have many pleasant recollec- tions of you. You have treated me much better than my Wilshiue's Exile to End 173 own country ever did. I shall never forget how you sheltered me, a poor exile. I would stay with you longer, were it not so troublesome, this sending manuscript to and fro between New York and Toronto. I may have to print my next number in Toronto, but after that I shall remain in New York unless Mr. Madden decides that I have again become too gay. Leave your latch-string out, Dear Lady of the Snows. 174 Socialism Inevitable BRYAN WILL DISCUSS SOCIALISM (April, 1904.) WHEN we say that Bryan will discuss Socialism we must hasten to add that there is a saving clause to this announcement, for the discussion is to be in "due time." He probably means that he will discuss Social- ism when Socialism is due. We gather this information from a Sandusky, Ohio, paper. Thomas H. Cowens, a prominent and wealthy Sandusky young man, and an ardent Socialist who takes great interest in the questions of the day, recently wrote to Bryan, asking him whether it was true that he refused to debate with Gay- lord Wilshire. Bryan replied: I will say that it is true that I refused to debate with Mr. Wilshire, as I have refused to debate with a great many others. Answering your other questions, I beg to say that the question of Socialism will be discussed in due time, but I do not accept the theory that the Trust is an economic evolution. Mr. Bryan enclosed a cartoon from his paper, the Com- moner, which he says is an illustration of the "manner in which the water is being squeezed out of the trusts," and adds that "this would indicate that they are anything but natural or legitimate." In the above Mr. Bryan at last admits that he refused to debate with Mr. Wilshire. This is the first time we ever knew he would even admit having received the challenge. We know that it is wearisome debating with every obscure crank who comes trotting down the pike, wishing to gain notoriety by mere association with a great man, and so heart- ily sympathize with Mr. Bryan's disinclination to accept such challenges. But Wilshire's challenge was not exactly of the ordinary variety. There was money to be paid to Mr. Bryan for wearying himself, if talking can be said to weary W. J. Mr. Wilshire, in short, offered him $10,000 for a short, but pain- Bryan Will Discuss Socialism 175 ful, two hours of his time, and put up a large cash deposit with Mr. Bryan's friend, Editor W. R. Hearst, as a guarantee of good faith upon his, Wilshire's part, so that there could be no doubt that the money would be forthcoming if Mr. Bryan would accept the challenge. Mr. Bryan simply paid no at- tention whatsoever to the challenge though it was made in such a way that he could accept the money either in his capacity as a speaker or as a lawyer. However, when it appears that even at this belated hour Mr. Bryan does not yet accept the theory that trusts are a result of economic evolution, and as evidence of the soundness of his views we see that he refers to the falling value of trust stocks, it is not difficult for us to determine why Mr. Bryan refuses to debate the Trust Problem. He knows nothing about trusts, he knows nothing about "economic evolution," and knowing enough to know that he doesn't know, he is wise enough to do all he can to keep the public dark as to his ignorance. It is worth a good deal more than ten thousand dollars to Mr. Bryan to prevent the world from suspecting how much he doesn't know. A debate would lift the cover oft his brain and let us see what a yawning vacuum exists there. It's both money and fame to him to prevent a call that will show what a bluff he makes in pretending he has gray matter to burn. The squeezing of water out of Trust stocks means nothing at all. When the Steel Trust or the Oil Trust or the Sugar Trust disintegrates and resolves itself into its component parts, and these parts once again compete with each other, then will we admit that the trusts are not the result of economic evolution. In the meantime we maintain that the Steel Trust is just as much a monopoly to-day, with its shares selling at ten dollars, as it was a monopoly last summer, when its shares sold at forty dollars. It is the dividends that determine the stock values, and it is the centralization of industry that determines monopoly. 176 Socialism Inevitable HOW WE WILL DIVIDE (April, 1904.) THE standard of value in an industrial society can be determined by the labor time required to make the article. Under Socialism it is improbable that there will be any difference in the valuation of one man's time over that of another. In the first place, everyone will be educated and fitted to do what he is capable of doing. To-day there is many a man who might have been a good doctor or lawyer or artist, but, owing to poverty, could not educate himself, and so is merely a common laborer. Under Socialism a man can always develop the best that is within him, and the system of education will be such that it will be developed. Instead of men being divided into hod- carriers and musicians, it is the labor, not the laborers, that will be divided. A man can have his life so ordered that he may have all his faculties, mental, physical and spiritual, de- veloped by the exercise of his daily work. There is many a professional man to-day whose brain would be stronger, his health better, and his life longer if he had the opportunity to perform some useful outdoor work. He probably knows it too, and desires it, but the conditions of our competitive sys- tem are such that it is practically impossible for him to com- bine the two lives, the physical and the mental. As for the hod-carrier of to-day trying to exercise his brain and soul by painting a few Madonnas or composing a Ninth Symphony, the mere mention of the idea conveys its absurdity. Under Socialism work will be so varied, so pleasant and so light that it will be done as a pleasure and not as a task. Then men will feel that work is just as much a necessity of their life as for the heart to pump blood. Does your heart ask pay for beating? Man in a natural state will ask for nothing better than the opportunity to work. A bee or an ant finds no greater pleasure in life than to work, and man, after all, is simply an animal with a soul. Work is life. How We Will Divide 177 Hence, under Socialism the idea of work as a task to be avoided will be as absurd as that of a honey-bee unwillingly flitting from flower to flower to gather the required amount of honey, and wishing all the time that it might spend its days in idleness. All this may sound too dreamy for the man who is so pre- judiced as a result of his present environment that he cannot imagine how men would act in another state. He cannot conceive that when we have Socialism the scramble will be for the privilege of working; not for the privilege of taking. In other words, the fun will be more in the making of the pudding than in the eating of it. These people who are worrying so much about how they are going to divide up the omelette before they find the eggs to make it with, should remember that to-day they at best can only get the egg shells, and that they can't run much risk by adopting a plan which promises them the eggs. To-day we do not profess to give products according as a man has produced. We simply hand the eggs over to the capitalist and stand on our hind legs begging and whining for the shells. When it amuses him to toss them to us we gratefully wag our little tails. Under Socialism we would have a system organized for the benefit of the workers, not for the drones. The theory is amusing that Socialism by enforcing economy will cut off the demand for luxuries, so that a man will be compelled to wear a home-spun suit, eat oat-meal, drink water, stop smoking, and buy only of the state store. Under Social- ism, on the contrary, a man will get what he produces. If he wants champagne, cigars, automobiles, diamonds, etc., nobody will object either to the wish or its realization, on con- dition that he gives his labor in exchange for the labor which produces what he gets. For instance, if he wants a pink pearl ground up in his coffee every morning, then he will either have to fish for the pearl himself or give up his labor to the chap who does it for him. Now, as pearls are not found in every oyster, and it takes, say, a week's hard and dangerous labor to get one pearl, it means that the man with a penchant for drinking ground pearls would have to work a week to pay for one drink. Probably after a few such drinks, he would decide of his own accord to give up his extravagant taste. Under Socialism the ordinary worker's income will be aug- 178 Socialism Inevitable mented to many times its present size, and he will spend it as he pleases. It will not be so very different from what would happen to the man who is now getting two dollars a day and should receive a sudden raise to twenty dollars. The usual thing to-day is that he promptly raises his standard of living to correspond to his larger income. He could, if he chose, work only one-tenth of the time, but he rarely makes such a choice. He will prefer to stop living at cheap restau- rants and patronize better ones. And it will be the same under Socialism exactly the same. Man will have more and he will spend more. Supply will increase and to equalize things, with the increased supply will come an increased de- mand. Private business under Socialism will not necessarily be wiped out. I may like a peculiar brand of wine or an odd kind of cheese, or rag-time music. The state may not bother to furnish me with such things. Do I lose them? Not much. I have plenty of money Socialist money and I use it to pay the maker of my peculiar wine, my cheese, my music. I am satisfied, for I get what I want. The producer is sat- isfied, for he gets his pay for the kind of work that he chooses to do. Again, if I want merely pure water, the state will be pretty sure to be in a position to give it to me for a reasonable payment in Socialist money time checks earned by my work. This work may be in the state water works, or it may be singing rag-time music for Jones, who has given me his time checks which he may have earned working in the city gas works. The time-clock system, therefore, offers a simple mechanical method for determining what each man should get. But that we shall ever use any such a system for any great length of time I hardly believe. Your heart doesn't wake you up in the morning by a knock on your ribs and demand pay for the work it did while you slept. If you had to busy yourself de- termining exactly how much blood you should give to each of your organs every day according to the work that organ did for you, your life would indeed be a burden. It would be less wearisome for you to say "grab what you can and let the slow grabber starve." Good Old Rockefeller 179 GOOD OLD ROCKEFELLER (July, 1904.) ONE of the most fortunate occurrences that could happen for Socialism is that the man who has most profited by the existing competitive system is one who so strictly conforms to the conventional ideas of religion and morality. If Mr. Kockefeller were noted for his profligacy or for his viola- tion of the ordinary business rules of life we might be able to blame the individual rather than the system ; but as a matter of fact even the most searching scrutiny into his methods, which is being given by Miss Tarbell in McClure's Magazine, discloses no such moral or legal delinquency as so many other of our great capitalists are guilty of. Miss TarbelPs story of Rockefeller, which is continued in last month's McClure's, is simply a long recital of the attempt of the various refiners and producers of oil to keep up an independent existence. She says that up to 1887 Mr. Eocke- feller had confined his attention to the refining of oil, and had not gone into the production of the raw material. In that year, for the first time, he was compelled to purchase oil bearing lands, inasmuch as the oil producers were forming a monopoly which threatened to cut him off from his supply of crude oil. Oil had always been at such a very low price, owing to over-production, that there had been no reason for Rockefeller himself producing it. Of course there were many and grievous complaints about the low prices, for which Eockefeller was held responsible. Examined upon this point by an investigating committee, he replied : "The dear people, if they had produced less oil than they require, we would have given their full price; no com- bination in the world could have prevented that, if they had produced less oil than the world requires." That this is true can be seen from the fact that the yearly production of crude oil had risen from Hvq and a half to thirty million 180 Socialism Inevitable barrels, and in 1883 thirty-five million were above ground in stock. Now Mr. Kockefeller could not be blamed for this great surplus, inasmuch as he had nothing to do with its production. It is true that he did limit the distribution to a certain ex- tent by putting up the price of his refined oil, but even if he had sold at absolute cost there would still have been over- production. The lowering of the price a few cents a gallon would have undoubtedly stimulated the demand for oil, but not nearly enough to have absorbed the total production. The earth has in its oil fields a great deal more oil than people can burn up this year; but the oil producers do not seem to think so, clinging rather to the idea that all they have to do to use up the earth's store for the ages is simply to reduce the price. But not only can the earth yield a great deal more than can possibly be consumed; but our competitive system pre- vents people from having means enough to buy what they want ; so that there are two very good reasons, either of which is quite sufficient to account for overproduction. Mr. Kocke- feller, it is true, has been absolutely relentless in his deter- mination to prevent and exterminate competition in the oil business, but that he has done anything that an ordinary business man would not do under similar circumstances to beat a competitor, is not very clear. The great difference be- tween Mr. Kockefeller and other men, is that he has had the courage and ability to resort to such measures. It must be admitted, however, that Wilshire's Magazine is rather a prejudiced witness in favor of Mr. Kockefeller, inasmuch as we are endeavoring to show that the fault, exists not in the individual but in the system. We are of the opin- ion, moreover, that the day is not far distant when McClure's Magazine will also come to the same opinion. Their brilliant contributor, Lincoln Steffens, does not hesitate to declare that the source of corruption exists, not in the innate wickedness of man, but in the innate wickedness of the competitive sys- tem under which man labors. In this, at least, we are fully agreed. Bkxan Explains Socialism 181 BRYAN EXPLAINS SOCIALISM (July, 1904.) ME. BRYAN* has at last been driven from cover by the attacks of the Chicago Chronicle, denouncing him as a Socialist. He has a long editorial in the last Com~ moner, in which he explains why he is not a Socialist. He ad- mits that he has come to the conclusion that monopoly in railroads, telephones and telegraphs has come to stay, and that, therefore, it is better to have public ownership than private monopoly. But he is not prepared to admit that there is any economic necessity for trusts in the manufacture of cotton and woolen goods, or whiskey, oil, tobacco, etc. He says : "These trusts are organized not because of any economic necessity, but for the purpose of destroying competition." The question I would like to put to Mr. Bryan is this : If it becomes an economic necessity to destroy competition, is not then the Trust an economic necessity? Mr. Bryan does not understand that the accumulation of surplus capital in this country, which has hitherto been poured into the build- ing of productive machinery, has finally become very much greater than any economic demand. Hence, overproduction has ensued, and overproduction means cut-throat competition, and cut-throat competition means bankruptcy unless it is prevented. If Mr. Bryan could only understand that the Trust is an absolute economic necessity to prevent over- production, we would have him right in line in seeing the necessity of the Trust ; and once recognizing the necessity of the Trust in manufacturing enterprises, he will be compelled to conclude with the Socialists that such monopolies along with railroad monopolies should be nationalized. Mr. Bryan is moving, but moving slowly. He says he now sees that the borrower is not on the same footing as the lender; therefore he favors limiting the rate of interest. He sees that the employee is not on the same footing as the employer, therefore he favors the limitation of the hours of 182 Socialism Inevitable labor, and the prevention of the employment of children. These are great steps in advance for Mr. Bryan, who, only a few years ago, was declaring for free trade in everything, labor as well as silver. He belonged, in fact, to the old Adam Smith school of laissez-faire economists. However, now that he sees that the employee is not on a footing with the em- ployer, and is endeavoring to place him more on an equality, we would like to ask him if the best way to accomplish this would not be to put him on an equality of wealth. This is what public ownership of the means of production would do. It is a pity that Bryan does not understand his economics better than he does, as there is no one in the country who has a better opportunity of getting his views heard. The Steikees and the Meat Tbust 183 THE STRIKERS AND THE MEAT TRUST (August, 1904.) THE strike of the Meat Trust's employees, and the conse- quent alarming and almost prohibitive rise in the price of meat throughout the country, is a very clear illustra- tion of the danger into which the trusts are dragging us. When a few men can prohibit the nation from eating meat, and a few others can prohibit us from eating bread, we are not far off from a much more effective despotism than Nero ever con- ceived. That the workers on strike have a most just cause is ad- mitted by any impartial observer. The following, written by Joseph Wanhope, who is perfectly familiar with the dreadful conditions of the trade in Chicago, will give the reader some idea of the conditions prevailing : It is a strike against a reduction of wages, involving a cent per hour, but so narrow is the margin on which these hunger- tortured wretches exist, that the difference of a cent probably means life or death to them. At any rate, it was the last straw. They are now out, and the contest between empty stomachs and the capitalists' dollar is on. Few people have any idea of the indescribable wretchedness in which these Chicago workers live. Right under the walls of the district, where perhaps more food is stored than on any other spot of a similar size on earth, the children of the un- skilled workers precariously employed in the monster packing houses, may be seen standing at the gates begging for the scraps of food that might be left in the dinner-pails of the better-paid workingmen. The district in which these unfortunates live is known in Chicago parlance as "back of the dump," a spot several acres in extent covered with the reeking garbage of the great city, and mixing its fetid odors with the ever-present stock-yard stench. Unpaved streets, with unfathomable mud-holes, dilap- idated and unsanitary hovels, cheap saloons and gorgeous churches, most of the latter subsidized by the packers, abound. Politically, the district belongs to one Carey, a saloon-keeping alderman, who is hand in glove with the packers, the clergy and the thugs of the neighborhood, and whose political agents, locally 184 Socialism Inevitable known as "Carey's Indians," serve to keep the "boss" in power as agent for the packers, and terrorize any intruders who would poach on his political domain. In this dreary and hideous district, the light of Socialism has never yet penetrated. Years of work and effort by the local com- rades have failed to secure a foothold there. And the inhabitants of this region, starved in body, stunted in mind, a combination of slavery, brutality and ignorance, in about equal proportions, have at last rebelled, and are now ready to give what battle they can to their pious exploiters. The outcome will be interesting, though there is little doubt but that these wretched people will be crushed back in sullen despair into their hideous dens, after an exhibition of "lawless- ness" that will afford the capitalists all the excuse they need for "taking vigorous measures for their repression," and for the maintenance of "law and order." But that they have rebelled at all is a hopeful sign. It may give the Socialists the long-desired opportunity to teach the only way out of the festering mass of misery and want that exists under the shadow of a mighty food reservoir, of which it is boasted that the armies of Europe must first make application before they can march, and which sends provisions by the millions of pounds to the uttermost ends of the earth. Whatever the intellectual capacity of these suffering people may be, there is no doubt, however, that the Chicago stock-yards furnishes an indictment against the damnable system of capitalism that can- not be paralleled elsewhere on the face of the earth. Fundamentally, of course, the question whether the strik- ers are right or wrong is of much less importance than whether the nation, as a whole, should, or should not, control the supply of such a vital necessity as beef. Under private ownership the assumption is that the production of goods is of interest only to the workers engaged in such production and to their employers. It is assumed that between competition among the workers for work, and competition among the employers for workers, things will automatically adjust themselves and the general public get its coal and beef and the other things it may want and can buy. But when we have competition among the workers eliminated by a trade union, and competition among the employers eliminated by a Trust, I should like to ask, Where does the dear public get off? It is true that the evolution of our industrial system neces- sitates both trusts and trade unions, but does the reiteration of this theory to a public shivering without coal, and hungry The Strikers and the Meat Trust 185 for meat reconcile it to the predicament in which it is placed? There is but one sure way for the dear public to warm and feed itself, and that is to learn to take care of itself, to paddle its own canoe, so to speak. Let the Public Own the Coal Trust and the Beef Trust: Let the Nation Own All the Trusts. 186 Socialism Inevitable SCIENCE BENEFITS THE RICH. (August, 1904.) OUE good clergymen and professors of political economy never weary of telling us that ^Rockefeller and others receive their great incomes as a reward for organ- izing the labor of society. They would have us infer that a man is paid according to his ability. They never even so much as hint at the fact that the immense mass of humanity are paid not in proportion to their product, but rather how little they can live upon. It is strange that Mr. Hearst, with all his zeal for the toiling masses, should not take a moment of time, while he is tossing up his cap for his new friend, Parker, and explain to his readers the impossibility of the working class being able to better their condition so long as the competitive wage system lasts. Yet, Hearst does see some things correctly. For instance, he notes that Professor 0. F. Cook, by the introduction of the Guatemalan ant, which destroys the boll weevil, and saves the cotton planters forty millions a year, will get nothing for his labor above and beyond his regular government salary. If Professor Cook were to be paid on an interest basis he should receive two thousand million dollars' worth of two per cent, government bonds. As it is he gets merely a living, and when he becomes old in the service, will be turned adrift without a pension. He might better have been a Filipino killer. It is to be noted that Professor Cook made his discovery while working, not for a competitive capitalistic corporation, but for the state. The same applies to Professor Koerberle, the man who discovered a remedy for the white scale which was destroying the orange groves of California some ten years ago. Koerberle heard that while there were scale insects in Australia, yet they did not seem to bother the oranges there, from which he rightly surmised that there must be some coun- tervailing influence. He found it to be the lady bug, the vedolia cardinalis, which makes a business of eating the white Science Benefits the Rich 187 scale. Koerberle sent over a colony of the Australian lady- bugs to California, and the little chaps throve so well in their new home and ate so many insects that in a few months Cali- fornia was rid of the pest. What Koerberle did for the orange crop Cook now promises to do for cotton. These two men in fact have saved the country millions of dollars, and yet neither will benefit per- sonally to the extent of one cent. And yet I imagine that either of them would feel completely rewarded if he could only have a guarantee from society that he would be supported while continuing to make scientific discoveries for the benefit of man. It is noteworthy, moreover, that as long as the competitive system and private ownership of property continues all these and other great discoveries do not inure to the benefit of society as a whole, but merely to the rich. The extinction of the boll weevil will add little or nothing to the pay of the negro cotton pickers, whereas it means much to the owners of the cotton fields and still more to the railways which have a monopoly of the cotton carrying. Similarly, the extinction of the orange scale in California gives the railways, which carry the oranges, the bulk of the gain. Competition, in fact, keeps the rate of wages and the price of oranges so low that neither the grower nor the picker gets much of anything. Yet the railways receive ninety cents on every box of oranges that California exports, and this rate has remained uniform for twenty years, although the price of oranges has decreased from $5 a box to less than $1.50. The railways have advanced sufficiently to know the beauty of combination, while the ordinary people are still working alon? on the old starvation competitive basis. The evolution of the human mind is indeed a slow process. 188 Socialism Inevitable WHAT GOOD IS GOVRENMENT OWNER- SHIP? (August, 1904. WHAT good can we expect from the government own- ership of utilities? I must say that the answers given by many Socialists to this reasonable ques- tion are not as convincing as they might be. With the present competitive system remaining in opera- tion government ownership is not necessarily any better for the people than private ownership. It might, and probably would be somewhat better, but I am not talking about the "might be's" I speak of the "must be's." As often pointed out, the Post Office is a nest of mismanagement and corrup- tion, and yet it is under government ownership. Then why urge that the railroads and other public utilities be put under government ownership? I don't. That is, I don't urge very hard. I can see some of my readers gasp with astonishment. "What's this? Wilshire not urging government ownership! Why, we thought that government ownership was an essential part of the Socialist program!" Not at all. If these gaspers would read my editorials long enough and carefully enough they would see that I am work- ing for the establishment of the Co-operative Commonwealth, and it is simply as a basis for this Co-operative Common- wealth that I declare for the government ownership of the machinery of production. I am cold, and to save myself from perishing demand clothing. Incidentally the clothing may make me more beautiful to look upon at the Horse Show, and may satisfy my ideas of modesty, yet both ap- pearance and modesty are of secondary consideration. Pro- tection from the cold, on the other hand, is an absolute neces- sity. But why do I wish protection from cold ? Simply be- cause I have an instinct which urges me to live rather than What Good Is Government Ownership? 189 die. So that when I ask for clothing it is really asking for life. Government ownership might, and probably would, be of general benefit to the community under our competitive system. We would probably have better rates and more comfortable transportation. The roads would be run for the benefit of the public instead of to make dividends for the Vanderbilts. At least that would be the theory. It might not work out that way, however, because the same interests which now control the Post Office might control the railways. Indeed, if the people were as negligent of their interests then as they are now, government ownership of railways under the existing competitive system might give us no benefits at all. This, I admit, is unlikely, and still it is not impos- sible. Under the Co-operative System, however, it would be dif- ferent. In the first place, inasmuch as all property would be owned by the State, there would be no powerful group of private property owners to dictate the policy of the State for their own benefit at the expense of the non-property owners as to-day, for instance, the railway owners dictate the policy of the government regarding post office affairs so that they may get excessive rates for carrying mail. Again, with a Co-operative System the products of industry would of necessity be distributed to the workers, as there would be no one else having any claim upon such products. If we were to allow private ownership of the railways and other machinery to remain, then those owners would naturally have some rights accruing from their title ownership ; other- wise what would be the use of their having a title? Now, the only rights that we can conceive of as being of any partic- ular use would be the rights entitling them to the products of labor without themselves working. If such were the case, and they took such products, it is evident that the workers would not be getting their entire share, and we would not be enjoying the co-operative system which we set out to establish. The present government office-holders, taking them as a whole outside the classified service, are naturally an incom- petent lot of grafters, for they are not there to serve the State, but to rob it. This is bound to continue as long as we have our system of private ownership of capital. In other words, 190 Socialism Inevitable we are bound to have corrupt officials just as long as we have men with money ready to buy franchises, and on the other side aldermen without money having franchises to dispose of, in which their interest as one of a large cornmunity is much smaller than their individual interest in getting the whole of the bribe from the capitalist. A Broadway franchise may be worth five million dollars to the City of New York. To me, as alderman, it is worth one five-millionth part of this, or exactly one dollar, for there are five million citizens to share it with me. Therefore, if I am paid anything over the dollar for my vote in favor of granting the franchise, I am so much ahead. And just as long as this condition of affairs exists there will be both men to buy aldermen and aldermen ready to be bought. Hence, if we wish to have honest aldermen we must have complete public ownership, so as to do away with the men who do the buying of aldermen. Where there are no buyers, of neces- sity there can be no sellers. Now, as to the harm combinations do the public. The Socialists hold that a combination of capitalists does not necessarily do any more harm to the people than does the single capitalist, but that they have more power to do such harm, and will exert that power whenever they find it to their interest to do so. And yet the harm that any particular com- bination can do, or actually does, is not of vital importance. The mere question whether the Standard Oil Company charges an exorbitant price for oil, or whether it sells it for only a fair price, is of no great economic import. If it charges too much, that is, if it charges a profit that is greater than the capitalist ordinarily expects from the sale of his manufactures, then it simply means that the workman who buys the oil must get higher wages to pay for it, and this higher wage comes out of his employer for the benefit of the Standard Oil Company. This means in turn that Kockefeller comes into possession of so many more dollars to invest than he otherwise would have had, and that the employer who paid the excess wages has so many dollars less to invest. Of course, it may be that the immediate employer may not be the loser, for he may add to the price of his goods the excess of wages he has to pay, and so shift the burden to some other capitalist. The point is that the high price of oil does not economically What Good Is Government Ownership? 191 hurt the workman because his wages are based on the cost of living. Oil is a necessity of life, just as is water, or bread, or meat. He must have sufficient wages to buy these neces- sities. If the price goes up his wages must go up or he will starve to death, for there is practically no margin for him to infringe upon. A high price of oil is a price made at the general expense of the capitalist class for the benefit of the Standard Oil Company, and means that the Standard stock- holders have the directing of the investment or the spending of a greater portion of the surplus products called profits, instead of a certain other set of capitalists. To the commu- nity as a whole it is of no practical importance whether capi- talist Kockefeller or capitalist Morgan gets the surplus. It is sometimes asked, are not Kockefeller and Morgan "the people ?" And, if so, what do we mean by saying the people should own the trusts when they already own them? Yes, Kockefeller and Morgan are the people, or rather, some of them, but the trouble is that the people are not Rockefeller and Morgan. The Morgans are very considerably less than ten per cent, of the people, while we wish to make one hun- dred per cent, of the people Morgans. Then why, you ask, do not laborers combine and set up shop for themselves? This is exactly what the Socialists propose. Only we do not propose that the shops should be small competing ones. That would not make things any better than they are to-day. Suppose a few hundred workers should combine and try to run a blast furnace. Where would they land, with pig iron selling at less than cost, as it is to-day, through competition and over-production ? Would the fact that they owned the furnace do the workers any good? Not at all; for instead of getting wages for their work they would be forced to pay assessments to keep the furnace in blast. Of course, this is an unusual case. Pig iron is not always selling at less than cost ; but, on the other hand, there is now a strong tendency for prices of all commodities to slump, and there is no economic reason why, if production keeps up to the present standard, we should not have over- production and a general fall of prices to less than cost. No, we do not wish any small production, with the co- operative owners competing for the sale of their products in the existing capitalistic field. We wish national ownership 192 Socialism Inevitable and the complete elimination of competition in the sale of products as well as in the sale of labor. We do not look forward to trade-unions taking the place of capitalists. We look forward to the people as a whole taking charge of the great industrial functions, regulating production upon the basis of what the laborers desire, and distribution upon the basis of what they produce. When Men Love Natuee 193 WHEN MEN LOVE NATURE (September, 1904.) ONE of the delights of walking in Central Park, New York, is to witness the confident tameness of the squir- rels. The pretty little creatures, so wild in the woods that only glimpses can he seen of them, are here as familiar as so many kittens. They have learned that man is not necessarily an enemy, a squirrel-killing monster to be avoided with the greatest care, but on the contrary has become their special friend and provider. Every man that approaches the squirrel, therefore, is regarded as a possible dispenser of delicious pea- nuts, and treated with becoming politeness and courtesy. It's a small thing, apparently, this friendship of the park squir- rels, but it makes us understand how much pleasure man loses by not being on good terms with all the harmless wild animals. Mr. Harold J. Bolce has a most interesting account in the Scientific American of the recent visit of American natural- ists to the distant island of Laysan, in the Pacific, where they have discovered some new birds and have added many novel facts in regard to known species. These were perhaps the first human beings whom the myriads of birds that crowd this tiny speck of land had ever seen, and the visitors, in consequence, enjoyed an adventure unusual in modern times. Birds, representing species which, in other lands, wing hur- riedly away at the sight of man, came up to the naturalists, looked curiously into their faces, perched on their writing tables, wonderingly inspected the tripod and other acces- sories of the cameras, and permitted themselves to be stroked. The fact that these birds are ordinarily regarded as the wildest kind of species made a profound impression on the visiting scientists. "Wherever we went," said Walter K. Fisher, who under Dr. Charles H. Gilbert directed the Laysan expedition, "we were free to watch and learn, and were trusted by the birds. It was a most touching and unique experience, and. one which 194 Socialism Inevitable demonstrates all too forcibly the attitude of wild creatures which have not yet learned that man is usually an enemy." Whenever a nest of white tern was approached, the birds would come and hover in front of the explorers. They would peer in- tently into the faces of the naturalists, as if attempting to dis- cover the purpose of the unusual intrusion. Among the odd instances of lack of fear on the part of these birds of Laysan, was the action of an albatross which came up and peeped into Mr. Fisher's face, and finding that he was disposed to be friendly began to make a critical examination of his camera. Many of the young birds of this species on the island permitted them- selves to be stroked, and soon acted as if they had been reared as pets. Some day when man ceases to murder his fellow man for money, and to shoot the wild birds for sport, the whole earth may become like Laysan. It sounds Utopian to think of a future when men will be friendly toward each other, and still more Utopian to predict that men and birds and animals will be friendly; yet nothing is really more scientific, for it is sub- ject to pioof. How TO BE Happx 195 HOW TO BE HAPPY. (September, 1904.) THAT the rich are above the law, no better illustration could be furnished than the action of the directors of the corporation that owned the steamer "General Slocum," which recently burnt up, with the loss of a thousand lives. The evidence snowed such criminal neglect to pro- vide life preservers and proper fire apparatus that the directors have been indicted for manslaughter. After the indictment, however, it was common talk that nothing would come of it all, and that the directors themselves are unafraid can be seen from the way they are acting regarding another steam- boat they own, the "Grand Kepublic," a sister ship to the "General Slocum." The "Grand Kepublic" is used exclusively for excursions, and has a legal carrying capacity of 3,700 passengers. Some weeks previous to the "Slocum" disaster I myself was a pas- senger on this steamer on a trip up the Hudson Eiver. There were at least 2,000 more on board than the law allowed, yet tickets were sold to all who applied. She was so crowded that when she made her stop at 125th street she started from 23rd a great many passengers got off, having realized by that time that the crowd was too great for comfort, quite apart from considerations of danger, and preferring to forfeit their fares rather than continue the trip. If a fire had occurred that day, even if there had been plenty of good life preservers, there would certainly have been an immense loss of life. This kind of overcrowding, moreover, is the rule with excursion boats, not only in New York, but in fact in every other American city. There is no country in the world where profits are put so far ahead of human life as in our dear Land of Liberty. However, to continue my story. After the burning of the "Slocum" there was a demand for a general reinspection of all excursion steamers about New York harbor. I am not 196 Socialism Inevitable very credulous, but I admit that I thought to myself that the lesson of the "Slocum" would certainly warn the directors to get the "Grand Republic" in shape to pass this new inspection. I did think that men under indictment for manslaughter would be careful to avoid another indictment. On the con- trary, not only did they fail to prepare the "Grand Republic," but they actually contested the right of the government to re-inspect! However, the re-inspection was made, and what the same inspector, two months ago, pronounced safe, he now pronounces unsafe. The life preservers were found to be absolutely rotten and incapable of sustaining even twenty-four pounds of lead, and the fire hose was as rotten as the life preservers. As for a fire drill, the crew had never heard of such a thing. Now it must be borne in mind that all this criminal negli- gence is found on the "Grand Republic" a full month or more after her owners had been indicted for criminal negli- gence regarding the "Slocum." If this diabolical conduct does not show a contempt for the power of the law when it comes to the protection of the weak and helpless, then there has never been an example of it in the history of nations. Money has now become such a power in this country, and has such an absolute dominance over our courts, that it is almost hopeless to look for any good results from the passage of laws designed to protect man as against the money-bag. We have seen how the trade-unions are being crippled by one decision after the other. We have seen how in Colorado the referendum is disregarded by the corporations and the Con- stitution scoffed at. Now if the nation is not ruled by money, it is certainly ruled by the men who rule money, and the only men who can rule money are those who own money. Ergo, if the Nation would rule money, it must own money. What is money? When we saw Rockefeller is worth lots of money what do we mean? Do we mean he has lots of dollar bills in his vest pocket? Of course not. Rockefeller might be worth a billion dollars and yet not have ten in the bank. Let him own the trusts and the railways, and he can own a billion of money whenever he wishes. The trusts com- mand money, and money commands the nation. Hence when How to be Happy 197 we use the word money we use it metaphorically. We don't mean actual dollars and cents, but we mean railways and other forms of capital, the ownership of which carries the power of extracting the dollars from the people. When I say, Let the Nation Own the Money, I do not mean, Let the Nation Own the Gold Dollars and the Greenbacks; I mean, Let the Nation Own the Trusts. Once owning the Trusts, the Nation will have no more difficulty than Mr. Kockefeller in commanding money. If we do not want to have any more loss of life in Iroquois theatres or Slocum steamboats, then let us do away with the profit system, which causes men to burn up their fellows for the sake of a few half-dollars. If we do not wish to shorten the lives of millions of our fellowmen who are working un- necessarily long hours in unhealthf ul factories, then let us be the owners of those factories ourselves and regulate our hours and the conditions of our labor. Instead of allowing a few soulless corporations to sweat and murder us on the plan of making the most profit utterly regardless of life, let us be our own masters. If we wish this earth to be our Paradise, then Let the Nation Own the Trusts. Does this sound hifalutin? What~ r is Paradise but a place where you do what you like? And what you like is obedience to God. This has an ugly sound - for most of us, since it usually means doing something we do not wish to do, in order that someone else may have the fruit of our work. Be unhappy yourself that someone else may be happy is no divine mandate. God's law, on the con- trary, is simply the law that impels us all to do what is best for the social organism, and when we do what is best for all, we are doing what is best for ourselves and thereby derive the greatest happiness. Under present conditions, however, we cannot do what is best either for ourselves, for our neighbors, or for humanity. Therefore we are unhappy and this world is not Paradise. We simply cannot be good as things are to-day, and unless we are good we cannot be happy. Hence no one is happy. If we would be good, we must have conditions which allow of goodness. The primary condition is liberty for each in- dividual to be able to work to the best advantage for humanity 198 Socialism Inevitable as a whole, for by so doing he is getting the best for himself. To do this we must control the earth and manage it for ourselves. Someone else cannot do this for us any more than someone else can be good and happy for us. To control and manage the earth we must own it, and as a first step toward that ownership we cry: Let the Nation Own the Trusts. Shaw's "Super-Man" 199 SHAW'S SUPERMAN (October, 1904.) BERNAED Shaw has at last arrived. I speak metaphoric- ally. Years ago, when I first visited London, it was in the beginnings of the Socialist movement, and Shaw was then a young Irish journalist, finding it difficult to make ends meet. However, it never daunted his spirits, and he was then, as he is now, the bright particular wit in our London So- cialist set. We all recognized his brilliancy ; in fact, Shaw him- self recognized it and joined with us in a general regret that the public were so blind to it. Not that we cared so much about Shaw's personal loss in his failure to win recognition, but we felt that if he were recognized, he would be able to get so much the better audience to which he might expound our, and his, Socialist views. I was not in great hopes, however, for I confess that I did not credit London and New York for the discernment they have shown in at last recognizing him. His plays were too clever, it seemed to me, to be adapted to a general audience ; this quite apart from the question whether they are really good plays from the purely dramatic stand- point. However, as said, Shaw has arrived, not only with his plays, but with anything that he may now write ; and that he is using his pinnacle to disseminate Socialism, although after his own particular methods, is unnecessary to state. Shaw and I were never altogether at one upon our Socialism, and I am not sure that either he or I are at one with anyone else in particular. Shaw never would grasp the meaning of the economic development of the Trust in the United States. Way back in 1890, when I was lecturing in London, he took the stage against me one night and endeavored to show that I was all wrong in my statement of America's being industrially in advance of Europe, and that it was this superiority of Amer- ica which had caused the Trust. Since then iiie American 200 Socialism Inevitable invasion of Europe has convinced Shaw that I was right in my facts, but I doubt if he yet agrees with me in my con- clusions. He started out with the rest of the Fabians as a Utopian revolutionist. The Fabian society took its name from the Fabian motto to make ready slowly but surely, to be able finally to give a sudden and deadly stroke. The Fabians have done with revolutionism nowadays and no longer quote their motto, although they still stick to the name. Last summer, when I was in London, I tried to explain to Shaw and the other Fabians that the revolution which I was predicting in America was not going to come from any slow preparation by the Socialists and then, finally, a terrible blow, but that it was brewing with the industrial development of the country. That the nearness of the climax was due not to any determination of the people to throw off their yoke, but to the absolute necessity of revolution in order to meet a great unemployed problem. All my talk, however, was in vain. The English Fabian classifies all revolutions together. He insists that by revolution one must mean the sudden uprising of the working class, the barricading of streets, the upsetting of the government, and the forcible instituting of Socialism over night by the work- ing class, against the will of all the other classes in the com- munity. Such a program no one is more willing than myself to admit is a silly, ridiculous one. None but the very young Socialists have any such ideas. Socialism, when it comes, will come with the practical assent of the whole community, although this assent will be "given only when it is evident to all that Socialism has become an absolute economic neces- sity. This day, according to my theories of economics, is not so far off, and the Trust, in which Shaw sees nothing, is the sign that I judge by. However, whether Shaw or myself are right upon the ques- tion of the Trust, there is no doubt that Shaw is doing some splendid literary work and, incidentally, is teaching the public a great many things that they ought to know. Arnold Daly made a remarkable success last winter in New York in the production of Shaw's "Candida," and the discussion of the Shaw's "Super-Man" 201 sociologic points raised by the play was of great value to all America. Shaw has just written another new play, "Man and Super- man." This certainly is high-water mark for Shaw, and those of my readers who wish to know why he has set the literary world afire must read it. Even if he fails to understand the Trust Problem, he does understand the Life Problem, and that is the more important. Here is a brief extract giving a dia- logue in hell, which takes place between Don Juan and the Devil (both characters in "Man and Superman") : Don Juan What you call bosh is the only thing men dare for. Later on, Liberty will not be catholic enough: men will die for human perfection, to which they will sacrifice all their liberties gladly. The Devil Ah! they will never be at a loss for an excuse for killing one another. Don Juan What of that? It is not death that matters, but the fear of death. It is not killing and dying that degrades us, but base living, and accepting the wages and profits and degradation. Better ten men dead than one live slave of his master. Men shall yet rise up, father against son and brother against brother, and kill one another for the great catholic idea of abolishing slavery. The Devil Yes, when Liberty and Equality of you which prate shall have made free white Christians cheaper in the labor market than black heathen slaves sold by auction at the block. Don Juan Never fear! the white laborer shall have his turn, too. But I am not now defending the illusory forms that great ideas take. I am giving you examples of the fact that this creature Man, who in his own selfish affairs is a coward to the backbone, will fight for an idea like a hero. He may be abject as a citizen; but he is dangerous as a fanatic. He can only be enslaved whilst he is spiritually weak enough to listen to reason. I tell you, gentlemen, if you can show a man a piece of what he calls God's work to do, and what he will later on call by many new names, you can make him entirely reckless of the conse- quences to himself personally. What can he deeper than his lines that man can only be enslaved when listening to reason? It sounds straining for a paradox, but it's not; it is merely the bald truth. Man does his noblest work when he appears to the world as the most unreasonable fanatic. The reasonable man tries to save his own soul; the unreasoning man saves the souls of others, and thus gains his own salvation. I had but little opportunity to see much of Shaw last 202 Socialism Inevitable year. Only time for a lunch with him and Mrs. Shaw, a delightful acquisition he has made since the old days, at his apartments on Adelphi Terrace. He is in much better health than formerly, owing, I am sure, to Mrs. Shaw's care in see- ing that his carrots and beets are sufficiently boiled, for Shaw is still a hot vegetarian. Formerly, when he accepted my invitation to dinner, he would note, "No corpses, please." I wish Shaw would come to this country and lecture. It matters not what his subject would be; he would be sure to talk Socialism, and his name would attract big audiences. What Men Vote Foe 203 WHAT MEN VOTE FOR (October, 1904.) THE great mass of voters, whether of the two old parties, of the Independents, or of the Socialist party, cast their votes in the way that they think will best benefit the country as a whole. The strongest and most fundamental instinct of man is to act so as to best preserve the race, since his own preservation would otherwise be impaired. It is true that there are always a few who will betray their fellow men in order to save themselves, but such men are the excep- tion. From earliest history, all records show that the indi- vidual man has laid down his life that the greater man, the race, or the nation, might live. The old cry, For God, King, and Country, was quite as perfect and as completely in har- mony with the evolutionary history of man if it had been scien- tifically prepared. And the cry is just as good to-day in our sordid struggle for wealth as it was in the days of Charle- magne. Equally true is it that wars, whether conducted with cross- bows, with modern rifles, or with the ballot, are all funda- mentally of the same nature. We vote as we used to fight, for God, King, and Country. By God, I mean the highest spiritual ideal that we are capable of conceiving; by King, I mean the material manifestation of this ideal in the form of our candidates and our party; by our Country, I mean that particular organization of society to which we happen to be individually attached, and which we naturally think the most important factor in the race as a whole. "Our Country," of course, is a very elastic term, and has a different meaning to men of different nationalities; and it is not always merely birth or residence that determines its definition. Before the Bevolutionary War, most Americans would have defined their own particular colony as their country, while up to the time of the Civil War, a Virginian would probably have applied the term to Virginia rather 204 Socialism Inevitable than to the whole nation. He certainly regarded the South- ern States as a much more important organism to hold intact and to fight for, than the nation as a whole, and his willing- ness to die for the South was well exemplified. If we go back to the time when men lived in nomadic tribes, we find that country meant simply the tribal organization, which was attached to no particular part of the earth, and that men were just as willing to die for their tribe as were the Vir- ginians for their sacred soil. It seems odd to say that the man who votes for a Roosevelt or a Parker is impelled to do so by the same fundamental motive that impels a man to die for his country, but such is really the case. Yet to those who have given careful and intelligent thought to the economic and social conditions, and who know that with the continuance of our competitive system the nation must remain in pain and poverty, it is folly to vote for either. Neither advocates a change of system. To vote for Eoosevelt or for Parker is simply to vote for the perpetuation of poverty, and the only excuse for such a vote is ignorance. This is the true explanation of most of the votes cast in this country, either for the Republican or Demo- cratic parties. It is not that the voters are aware what these parties stand for, nor knowing that things could be changed for the better, that they wish them to remain as they are. Not at all. The Republican is just as sincere in thinking that by voting for Roosevelt he is working for the best interest of the country as is the Socialist who votes for Debs. The only difference between them is one of knowledge. A great many Socialists have the erroneous idea that the Republicans and Democrats can see that the present competitive system robs the producers, but vote for its continuance because they hope to participate in the swag. As a matter of fact, I doubt if there is a single individual in either party, not even Rocke- feller or Morgan, who understands the inevitable exploitation of the producer as the natural outcome of the competitive system. Workingmen by the thousand who are going to vote for Roosevelt have practically the same economic views as those held by the capitalist, and no more realize that they are living under a peculiar and unnatural system of industry than the codfish realizes that it lives in water. They think the present system is a permanent one ; that it is the natural and What Men Vote For 205 perpetual order of industry. Therefore their only aim is so to foster business that the capitalist may be prosperous, and employ workingmen at high wages and short hours. It is the aim of the politicians to convince the voters that their particular man, Parker or Eoosevelt as the case may be, is the man who will best conduct the country in the capital- ists' interest. The capitalist will be swayed by such arguments because he wishes to make money; and the workingman, be- cause he knows that if the capitalists make money, he may get better wages. It is the mission of the Socialist, on the other hand, to make plain to the people, whether they be capitalists or work- ingmen, exactly what the competitive system means. That the workingmen should be, and are, more receptive than the capitalists to Socialistic philosophy, goes without saying; but it is an entirely unwarranted assumption that the capital- ist, once intellectually convinced of the iniquity of the com- petitive system and of the superiority and practicability of Socialism, will still be averse to a change. It is often difficult to make the workingman understand the possibility or the desirability of this change, yet nobody would think of at- tributing his slowness of comprehension to the idea that he is a beneficiary of the present system : it is plainly mere rank stupidity. With the capitalist this also may be true, in which case his stupidity is enhanced by his unwillingness; but the fact remains that he usually does not understand, and may, therefore, be said to oppose the movement blindly. That it is impossible to convert a capitalist to Socialism is false, both from experiment and from theory. Let us, therefore, make it our business to show all men, whether, they be rich or poor, the injustice of the present competitive system. Let us show them that under Socialism, all classes will be benefited beyond words. That not only will the workingman receive his just dues, his full product, but that he will live in a genial world where all men are brothers, and the fear of want is forever abolished. Let the rich man see that, although he will lose the opportunity of appropriating to himself the earnings of others, he wiil, nevertheless, be immeasurably happier in a world where men no longer scheme to defraud one another, and successful robbery will bring neither honor nor pleasure to the robber. 206 Socialism Inevitable Let lis once convince the voter that it is up to him to decide with his ballot whether poverty shall continue or not, and the mere question of the strenuosity of a Koosevelt or the conservatism of a Parker fades into obscurity before the broader problem of justice to man. Class vs. Class: Resultant 207 CLASS VS. CLASS: RESULTANT (November, 1904.) SOMETIMES people enroll themselves as Socialists under the impulse of the moment, hut later, upon attending some Socialist meeting and hearing a speaker declare the absolute necessity of accepting the "Class Struggle" the term being used in its most limited sense as prerequisite to being labeled a good, sound Socialist, they come to the conclusion that they have joined the wrong movement. They may have accepted the necessity of the abolition of the competitive system, and the introduction of a co-opera- tive system, based upon the public ownership of the means of production, and have supposed that this was enough to qualify them for membership; but when they find that they must not only endorse Socialism, but also agree that it shall be brought about in one particular way and no other, viz., by the working class organizing and forcibly taking posses- sion of the earth in spite of the active and continued oppo- sition of the capitalist class, they naturally recoil. Where- upon they find themselves subjected to the scorn of the "ortho- dox" Socialist, and are told that they do not understand the doctrine as laid down by Marx. But what is the Marxian position? Let me give a state- ment of it, with which I myself entirely agree, taken from a recent editorial in Justice, the official organ of the English Socialists : Briefly stated, the Marxian proposition amounts to this: All wealth is the result of labor applied to natural objects. It is as impossible to differentiate between the proportion of wealth due to natural objects and that due to labor as it is to say how much of a child belongs to the father and how much to the mother. Labor is the father and earth the mother of all wealth. Capital is that part of the product which is set aside for reproductive purposes. In itself it is part of the product of labor. The total product, therefore, is due to labor and belongs to labor. In private hands, however, capital becomes not only a means of 208 Socialism Inevitable reproduction, an accessory to labor, but also a means for exploit- ing labor. All wealth, therefore, which goes to others than the workers, is so much robbery of labor. It is in antagonism to this theory of labor that modern Socialism takes its stand. It insists upon the class antagonism necessarily arising from the exploita- tion and robbery of labor through the class ownership of the means of production, and aims at the extinction of this class struggle by the emancipation of the proletariat and the abolition of the class ownership of the means of production. Now, one who cannot see the necessity of a class struggle preceding the institution of Socialism, has a very poor idea of Marx's position, and, in fact, must be going through the world with closed eyes and ears. Indeed it is not necessary to be a Socialist at all to see the class feeling that exists between the rich and poor. Furthermore, while it may be regarded as extremely improbable, it is not absolutely im- possible that the rich, with the palpable injustice of the present system appealing to their higher natures, and at the same time convinced that this system must soon give way of its own weight, and that the period of transition may prove a time of great danger and hardship to both rich and poor it is not impossible, I say, that a very considerable proportion of the rich will themselves join with the working class and assist actively in the bringing about of Socialism. Indeed, it is my own belief that this may occur, and yet I am a be- liever in the "Class Struggle." Of course, I am not Utopian enough to suppose that any considerable body of the rich will ever advocate Socialism until it is evident to them that the ship of capitalism is about to founder, and that it is time for all sensible rats to desert. But simply because I believe that many capitalists have the L brains of rats, and that quite a number have the hearts of ordinary men, I have had it thrown at me that I am relying upon the rich to hand us Socialism upon a silver platter. This is palpably absurd. We will get nothing except that which must, from the inexorable course of evolutionary pro- gress, be given us : our exact due, no more, no less. CNow, inasmuch as Socialism will be of essential benefit to the whole of humanity, and as the individual lives only by and through the racial life, it is fundamentally instinctive with him to sacrifice himself for the sake of the race. This in- stinct, moreover, is equally strong in all of us, that is so far Class vs. Class: Eesultant 209 as class distinctions are concerned. It may vary in individ- uals, but I doubt if any particular variance can be found according to class. It manifests itself in various ways. Going to war "to save the Union" was a very popular way to display it about forty years ago, and certainly no one would say that either in the South or in the North was the eagerness to enlist determined by the fact that a man belonged to the working class or to the capitalist class. A child falls off a ferry boat; a man plunges in to save it. The chances are that he is a poor man, but simply because there are many more poor than rich, and not because a rich man would not be as ready to risk his life to save the child. Hence, so far as racial instinct is con- cerned, a rich man may be as likely to advocate Socialism as a poor man, and the fact that certain rich men do advocate Socialism is in evidence. Socialism, however, like war, not only affects the race as a whole, but individuals in particular. That is, the individual may be more influenced by the effect on himself, or on his class, than by the effect upon the race in general. If he is a working man, he has, as Marx declared, nothing but his chains to lose and a world to gain; and the only excuse an American workingman can have for not being a Socialist is a defective intellect. If he is a rich man, he may hastily conclude that it is better to let things remain undisturbed, bad as they are for the majority, so long as they are fairly good for him. He is not forced to do disagreeable work, and has all the good things of life that he wants. Hence his racial consciousness is not so pronounced as to make him feel that he cannot enjoy his life without having all other men enjoy it. Thus it may be, and usually is, that the rich man opposes Socialistic legislation simply because it tends to diminish his present-day pleasures. Nevertheless, in this same rich, selfish man the racial in- stinct exists even though it may lie dormant. How often we have had the example of rich men pursuing their end of money-getting in the most relentless way, and then be- queathing their wealth for the general good. There is no man who would not do good for the race if he felt that the doing of it would not result in evil to himself individually, and there are many men who will do good for the race even 210 Socialism Inevitable if it mean death to themselves individually. Between these extremes lies all human nature. I am of the belief that our industrial evolution has now proceeded so far that a crisis is almost at hand that will practically make all of us see the absolute necessity of most heroic measures being taken to meet it. I think a huge un- employed problem of unexampled proportions is about to de- velop. It would be with us to-day were it not that certain unanticipated events have raised the price of wheat and cotton so high that our farmers are in position to buy goods of our manufacturers for home consumption to such an extent that over-production is being unexpectedly relieved. All this, however, is but temporary. The day of joy for the cotton and wheat growers will not last forever. When this crisis occurs, it will not be necessary for the people to study Marx to understand that something must be done to relieve the situation. Millions of unemployed men mean millions of dollars lost to the capitalists, and there will be a national demand for government action, much like the demand for the President to intervene at the time of the great coal strike. Furthermore, this will not be particularly a class demand, but will be from the whole nation, because the whole nation will be affected. The demand for the settlement of the coal strike was not from the working classes alone, but from the general public who were being put to great inconvenience by the stoppage of the coal supply. When the demand for national action becomes pressing enough, if the President should not appoint a national com- mittee, there will be a committee formed some other way. The national demand must have an organ to express that de- mand, and not only to express it, but to carry out its wishes. This demand in the early stages of the crisis will be very indefinite. It will be merely to the effect that something must be done, something, anything to relieve the crisis. It will be a demand of such an indefinite character and so far from revolutionary that the most conservative people will join in voicing it. It may be nothing more than a general plan for the nation to give work at nominal pay to the unem- ployed, and will, in all probability, receive general support from religious and charitable people. Class vs. Class: Kesultant 211 But as these first attempts to brush back the sea of revolu- tion with the broom of charity are found to be futile, more decided measures will be agreed upon. I say "agreed upon" because of my picture of a national committee hastily called together by the nation with the mandate to settle the crisis. If mild remedies do not avail, then severer and severer ones must be used until at last the heroic dose of Socialism will be administered as the only possible remedy adequate to save the nation's life. At the beginning of things Socialism will not be generally thought of. It will only be the inexorable logic of events piling up with terrifying rapidity that will finally bring the conservative members of the revolutionary national com- mittee to see the necessity of Socialism. And even when they do see it they will probably regard it as simply a tem- porary remedy and think that conditions after a while will simmer down so that we may go back to the old times of competition and private ownership. Now when it becomes necessary to give bread to the workers in New York city, the wheat of Minnesota must be requisitioned, elevators must be operated to transfer the wheat from boats to cars, and Vanderbilt's railways taken and operated by the Government, as in war time, to bring it to the Atlantic. This will be at the final stage of the crisis, when trying to feed the people with the machinery of production under private guidance has proved a failure and the Govern- ment is forced to take over the machinery itself. It is true that this event may be looked upon as a mere temporary affair, such as the taking over of a railway in the Civil War, but there will never come a time when the steps can be retraced and private ownership restored. This, to me, is the likely course of the revolutionary process by which we will be landed into Socialism. I think we will never have Socialism until the workers of the nation become conscious of being a class, and a disin- herited class, and until, as the result of this consciousness, they struggle as a class for the institution of a new era in which they will be equal participators with all at the festal board of humanity. But I do not think the working class will become class-conscious until, in the course of economic evolution, material conditions have prepared the ground for 212 Socialism Inevitable this consciousness to manifest itself. The chicken's brain is not developed until after its body nor until it is physically ready to emerge from its shell and live a new life. But the very economic conditions which develop the class-conscious- ness of the poor also develop the class-consciousness of the rich. When the poor realize that the present competitive system means death to society, the rich also will realize it, and will see the necessity of surrendering to the inevitable. It is true that inasmuch as the poor are in the vast numerical majority, it may be argued that even if the rich do not peaceably surrender they can be forced to do so by the superior power of the poor. True enough, but that the rich should enter into a hopeless struggle against both the Will of Man and the Will of God is too insane an idea to be entertained. By the Will of God, I mean the economic development of industry, for, after all, when we say God's Law or Will we simply mean a progress of events which is so in the nature of things that no one who recognizes the reason of the progression will attempt to interfere with it. There are not many "Mrs. Partingtons" nowadays trying to force back the tide with a broom. We Socialists, who hold to the materialistic conception of history, should have to admit having formed a ridiculously low estimate of the intelligence of the rich if we should deny the possibility of their recognizing the breakdown of the present system when the evidences of it are so palpable that an idiot could not fail to see them. In short, as material- ists, we must concede that both a rich man and a poor man must at a certain final stage of the progress of evolutionary development of society see the inevitability of the wreck of our competitive ship of state. A landlubber may not see any cause for worry at a certain sound that reaches his ears; yet the captain may know that it is the sound of breakers upon a reef, and that his ship cannot possibly escape. The lubber may not know of the danger at the moment, but it only requires a loud enough roar of the breakers to make him realize the situation as clearly as the captain. If he is in the steerage it may be that the food and lodging are such that he would look forward to the termination of his voyage with more impatience than if he were in the cabin, and might therefore see the shore quicker Class vs. Class: Kesultant 213 because of his alertness ; but even so, it would only be a matter of hours until the man in the cabin would see the shore, be it reef or dock, quite as plainly as the steerage passenger. This metaphor, of course, is not exact: no metaphor is. Perhaps, if I had used the word galley-slave instead of steer- age passenger, it would have been nearer the mark, but even that would not exactly express the case. The ship of state is not being propelled onward by forces with which the passengers have nothing to do. Its move- ment is the resultant of the action of class upon class. It becomes socially conscious as the resultant of such interaction, and Socialism will result when we become socially conscious of its desirability and necessity. The Social consciousness is the resultant of the class consciousness of the poor working upon and against the class consciousnes of the rich. It is absurd to deny that class consciousness will not develop with either rich or poor, or that the two classes will not, as classes, oppose each other, as it is equally absurd to say that there will be no resultant as the effect of the meeting of these two opposing forces. The resultant is the social con- sciousness that will make us realize the necessity of Social- ism. Those young beginners in Socialism who deny the neces- sity of the class struggle and class consciousness, however, are no more unscientific than the older heads who would have us believe that it is merely the class consciousness of the workers that is to guide society in its final movement to Socialism. We must, it is true, depend ultimately upon the social consciousness, but it is certainly too early as yet to rely upon that force. The two classes must first become conscious of their position and engage in a definite struggle with each other. Meanwhile the position of the Socialist must neces- sarily be upon the side of the working class, even though he may look forward to a future where there will be no classes and no class struggles. The class struggle is necessary to develop that class con- sciousness which is the prelude to social consciousness, which, in turn, will lead society to welcome the change to Social- ism. 214 Socialism Inevitable A WORLD TRUST (November, 1904.) Boston, Sept. 23. A dispatch to the Transcript from Pitts- burg says that two Pittsburg men, President James A. Chambers and Vice-President M. K. McMullin, of the American Window Glass Co., are at the head of the effort to form a world's trust in window glass. A dispatch from Brussels says they have a four months' option in which to purchase all the salable glass fac- tories in Belgium. When Messrs. Chambers and McMullin went abroad, it was with a view to making an agreement to curtail production and maintain prices at a profitable point. It is ex- pected that they will return to Belgium in December. The negotiations with independents, co-operatives and workers in America last spring were notably successful. A short lire has been secured, as the plants will not resume operations till November 1st. All surplus stocks can be absorbed, and prices maintained at the present high level. Last year the window- glass business in America was aided by the Belgian strike. I take the above from the Evening Post. It is always a matter of wonderment to me that the editor of that staid old paper can publish such an item, indicating a new and remarkable development of industry, and then not give even a line of comment in his editorial column. The explanation, however, is simple: he has nothing to say. The Evening Post for many years was the leading exponent of the laissez-faire theory of political economy. Give us free trade and an honest administration, it said, and the social problem is solved. Hence, when the trusts first appeared, no paper was louder in denunciation of what it called the "brigands of commerce." Up to that time I, myself, had been more or less an admirer of the Post, and persisted in the belief that it was at least honest in its wrong theories. I was soon to be disillusioned. In 1884-85 I wrote a number of letters to it upon this subject, showing the injustice of blaming the capitalists for doing what they were forced to by the inexorable laws of trade, I was not a Socialist then, A World Trust 215 but had sense enough to see the absolute necessity of the Trust, which meant, to me, its inevitability. The Post, how- ever, refused to publish any of my letters, much to my astonishment, as I had thought until then that any communi- cation upon such an important subject would surely be pub- lished. I have learned more about the art of modern journalism since then. The newspaper of to-day never tells the truth, except as a matter of necessity, unless the truth happens to correspond with what it thinks its readers like. Now at that time the Post thought its readers wanted the trusts de- nounced as inexcusable nuisances, and to have me come along and offer a reasonable excuse for their formation and exist- ence would make the demand for their abolition appear ridiculous. As it could not answer me, it took the shortest way out of the difficulty by suppressing my letters. I appear to be the only editor who always stands by and publishes any- body's letter on any side of the political question. A Week Later. I must now modify my criticism, since the Post has at last expressed itself upon this very subject. I copy from its editorial of October 1st: The rapidity with which the Trust question has been coming to the front in Mexico has been plain from the progress recently made in railway consolidation in that country and the total reorganization of the country's industry upon the oasis of the "community-of-interests" principle. The "small producer" is, as usual, putting in his complaint and his request for relief. Mine- owners urge that the American Smelting and Refining Company, which has absorbed most of the mines and nearly all of the smelters in Mexico, is now closing some of the best mines in the Sierra Mojada region, in its effort to control the output and the price of ores. It is now stated that President Diaz is con- sidering the advisability of putting a check upon the growth of trusts by officially prohibiting them. President Diaz may learn a useful lesson from the experience of the United States Con- gress, which prohibited Trusts by the Sherman Law with such effect that by 1900, according to Senator Hanna, "there was not a Trust in the United States." As it appears to be American capitalists that are causing trouble in Mexico, it may be that the Trusts have been driven to that country from the United States. It will be interesting to see where they will go when they have been driven out of Mexico by President Diaz. Further dispatches attest the progress that is being made by American capital in competition with foreign. Recent announce- ments have given good ground for the belief that Americans may 216 Socialism Inevitable prove dangerous, not merely as sellers in European markets, but also as competitive producers on foreign soil. The most noteworthy development of the sort was seen in the recent pur- chase of the English firm of Ogden's, Limited, by the American Tobacco Company a step which has aroused serious apprehen- sion not merely among English tobacco manufacturers, but gen- erally throughout the whole field of British industry. Further progress in the direction of American control of foreign industry has now been made by the Glass Trust's acquisition of the Bel- gian glass factories at Charleroi. While the Trust has not succeeded in obtaining the entire ownership of the factories, it has acquired a large, if not controlling, interest. The Trust, with its enlarged scope, will now, it is thought, be able to govern the market and control wages. Taken in connection with other transfers of American capital to foreign fields of investment, these two encroachments must be regarded as highly significant. They indicate where the headship of industry is likely to be found in the future. They will be a source of disappointment to those who have laid stress on the difficulty of forming interna- tional combinations of capital. They will, however, bring new problems to the attention of governments, and may raise the practical question whether the governments themselves are stronger than the Trusts. The Post is not unamusing when it wonders where the dear little trust birds will roost when Hanna shoos them out of this country, and Diaz shoos them from Mexico. Yet it is still more amusing, although quite unconscious of it, in its plaintive query whether the trusts are stronger than the government or not. It evidently fears that the trusts may some day shoo the governments away and roost in the coop themselves. Let me assure you, dear Post, that the trusts moved in long ago and the governments are simply their tenants at will. You don't believe it? Well, you did not believe me when I predicted ten years ago that American capital would be so superabundant in this country that it would be forced to invest in Europe. The Death of the Democbatic Paety 31? THE DEATH OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY (December, 1904.) IF ever the Socialist philosophy was justified by election re- sults, it was by that of November 8, 1904. Political par- ties are merely the organs of different groups of men who are more or less conscious of what they want, and have organ- ized to attain these wants by political action. However, just as organs in the human body will persist for a time after their reason for existence has departed, so will political organs or parties persist when the day of their usefulness has forever gone. We have muscles to move our ears, although we have no use for such muscles. But there was a day when our remote ancestors could, and did, prick their ears as well as any horse, and in those days ear muscles were manifestly a necessity. Finally, when we ceased to prick our ears, the muscles grad- ually lost their power of contraction; but they are still with us, although probably diminishing in size from century to century, and some day will no doubt completely disappear in the process of evolution. The Democratic Party has been swept off the political board. It is true that it remains in the Solid South, yet it lives there simply as a makeshift barrier against negro domi- nation, and as a convenient crowbar for certain politicians with which to break into fat political jobs. Neither in the North nor in the South does it justify its further existence, for it has ceased to be the representative of the ideas of any particular economic class, and nothing else can justify life in a political party. When the Democratic Party was the representative of the slave power, and of the agricultural interests of the South as opposed to the manufacturing interests of the North, it had a right to live. Moreover, when the slave power died, it still justified its right to live by continuing to represent the 218 Socialism Inevitable economic class in this country, which found its interest in a low tariff, as opposed to the high tariff demanded by the manufacturers through the Bepublican Party. But finally, with the practical acceptance by all classes of the permanent economic value, under our present competitive system, of a high tariff, the reason for the existence of the Democratic Party was once more in question; and had it not gained a new lease of life by taking up Free Silver, and suddenly pos- ing as the representative of our rapidly decaying class of small capitalists, it would have died a natural death in 1896. However, after two tries at the Presidency under the semi- radical banner of Bryan, the Democratic leaders saw that a silver brick would never win the Presidential game, and decided that the party must make a new move. The Hearst wing thereupon cried "forward," while the Hill-Belmont- Cleveland wing said "backward." Hill won, as we know, nominated Parker on the "safe and sane" platform, sent out a gold-brick telegram, and backward the Democratic Party went, so far back, indeed, that it has gone out of sight. But let it not be supposed that if the Hearst "forward policy" had been adopted, the result would have been ma- terially different. The Democratic defeat would have been as great, if not greater, only there would have been a some- what different lot of political corpses on the battle-field. Parker sought to revive the old-time Democratic Party, not understanding that the reason for its life had departed and, therefore, that it could not possibly be resuscitated; and the fact that he got any votes at all in the North was simply an illustration of this law of the persistence of an organ after its function has been lost, like the aforementioned muscles of the human ear that have outlived their usefulness. The Democratic Party is like the turtle that walked about after having lost its head : it is dead, but doesn't know it. On the other hand, Hearst with his programme of public ownership, and of denunciation of private wealth, could not have attracted a much larger vote, because he presents no tangible relief to any particular class. It is true that the people as a whole are probably tepidly in favor of public ownership, and most of us will say that it's a scandal that Eockefeller has so much money; but we are not sufficiently exercised over the matter to organize into a political party The Death of the Democratic Party 219 and express such views at the polls. Why? Because the Hearst programme cannot be shown to lead anywhere. We have poverty among us; we see our country given over hand and body to the rich; but seeing all this does not make it clear that denunciation of the rich or even the public owner- ship of trusts and railways will help matters much. Public ownership of a part of the machinery of production simply means that the owners of the part remaining in private hands will reap the share of profits that formerly went to the owners of the property taken over by the govern- ment. The people generally who are not owners of property of any kind will get absolutely no benefit from the Hearst programme of public ownership. What is needed, of course, is the abolition of the com- petitive wage system. Socialists demand public ownership merely as a necessary basis for the substitution of the Co- operative System in place of the Competitive System. We demand this change in the name of the propertyless class, the proletariat, and have organized the Socialist Party as the organ to effect it politically. We see that no help can come to us as a class, nor to the people as a nation, for our economic ills, except by the complete abolition of the competitive sys- tem, together with the private ownership of property upon which it rests, and the substitution of the Co-operative System based upon the public ownership of property. We believe, therefore, that the Socialist Party has a sound and logical reason for its existence. We have a distinct class to represent, and we know what will benefit that class, namely, Socialism. And the immense vote for the Socialist Party shows that the people have at last begun to recognize our contention. On the other hand, the Democratic Party represents neither a part of the people as a class, nor the whole of the people as a nation. It represents nothing, and, therefore, logically should receive no support. The Eepublican Party represents the people who wish the present capitalist system to continue and to work along as smoothly as possible. Its supporters are capitalists who look no further ahead than profits, and wage earners whose ideal is a full dinner pail. It has had its great victory because the mass of the people have no idea of the possibility of chang- 220 Socialism Inevitable ing the competitive system to a better one, and believe that if the present system is to continue, then there is no better way to make the wheels run smoothly than to uphold the ^Republican Party. If we want things as they are, therefore, we should all be Eepublicans. If we want things as they cannot be and should not be anyway, let us cling to the corpse of the Democratic Party. If we want things as they must be and should be, then we must all become Socialists. This election really for the first time gave the world a good view of the new Socialist Party. It was the first Presi- dential election in which a ballot was cast for candidates nominated by a party of that name. And it is significant that what is practically the birthday of the Socialist Party should prove to be the death-night of the Democratic Party. The Two Nations 221 THE TWO NATIONS (January, 1905.) FOR many years prior to 1902, a certain man, Loud, has represented the Southern Pacific Eailway, and Wells, Fargo & Co/s Express, in Congress, although nominally representing the people of California. Loud has been notorious for his attacks on any project that might extend the utility of the post office, and has publicly declared that it would be a good thing if the post office were in the hands of a private corporation. He not only antagonized the post office, however, but he incautiously went so far as to extend his antagonism to the post office employees. They wanted fair pay for their work, and would probably have gained their point had not Loud taken it upon himself to defeat their bill. The result was that they banded together and two years ago made a fight on Loud's re-election and defeated him. There is no charge that money or undue influence was used. The post office employees simply pleaded with the voters in Loud's district to send some man to Congress who would stand for labor instead of capital. The electors responded, and Loud was defeated. But Loud was a particular friend of the President, and so was not to be driven from the public crib. He has now been appointed, of all men, at a salary of $7,500 a year, to represent the United States at the International Postal Con- gress, which meets in Rome next summer. Loud will no doubt inform the Congress that the United States is contem- plating selling the post office to Wells, Fargo & Co.'s Ex- press. He will certainly say that we ought to make such a sale. The temerity of the workingmen in thus taking to the ballot as a method of obtaining their rights strikes President Roosevelt as most unmannerly and dishonorable. To quote his words ; 222 Socialism Inevitable The letter carriers, both municipal and rural, are as a whole an excellent body of public servants. They should be amply paid. But their payment must be obtained by arguing their claims fairly and honorably before the Congress, and not band- ing together for the defeat of those Congressmen who refuse to give promises which they cannot in conscience give. Workingmen, we learn, are to stand politely, hat in hand, before their servants, for a Congressman is but a public servant, and to plead humbly their wishes, bow themselves out with an apology for giving trouble, and then wait results. If no results come, they must be patient and not presume to send some one else to Congress who will be more open to sug- gestions, even after they have tried the bowing and scraping game unsuccessfully for years. This idea of Eoosevelt's that Congressmen have a divine right to rule, instead of being merely servants to obey the public will, is about the most remarkable utterance ever given forth by an American President. Not only does Eoosevelt object to political activity on the part of workingmen, but he is especially severe upon any resort to violence. He says : But when any labor union seeks improper ends, or seeks to achieve proper ends by improper means, all good citizens and more especially all honorable public servants must oppose the wrongdoing as resolutely as they would oppose the wrongdoing of any great corporation. Of course any violence, brutality, or cor- ruption should not for one moment be tolerated. Mr. Eoosevelt says nothing about corruption or violence if committed by capitalists. He has nothing to say about the action of General Bell of Colorado. And while he denounces violence by trade unions, no matter how just may be their cause, he commends violence if done by a nation in the cause of justice. To quote once more from one of his public utter- ances : There are kinds of peace which are highly undesirable, which are in the long run as destructive as any war. Tyrants and oppressors have many times made a wilderness and called it peace. Many times peoples who were slothful or timid or shortsighted, who had been enervated by ease or luxury, or misled by false teachings, have shrunk in unmanly fashion from doing duty that was stern and that needed self-sacrifice, and have sought to hide from their own minds their shortcomings, their ignoble motives, by calling them love of peace. The peace of tyrannous terror, The Two Nations 223 the peace of craven weakness, the peace of injustice, all these should be shunned as we shun unrighteous war. The goal to set before us as a nation, the goal which should be set before all mankind, is the attainment of the peace of justice, of the peace which comes when each nation is not merely safeguarded in its own rights, but scrupulously recognizes and performs its duty toward others. Generally peace tells for righteousness; but if there is conflict between the two, then our fealty is due first to the cause of righteousness. Unrighteous wars are common, and unrighteous peace is rare; but both should be shunned. The right of freedom and the responsibility for the exercise of that right cannot be divorced. One of our great poets has well and finely said that freedom is not a gift that tarries long in the hands of cowards. Why do nations fight ? Usually because one nation thinks it will experience an economic gain by resorting to violence. Because it thinks, or at any rate alleges it thinks, that justice will not prevail unless it goes to war. There was never a war where both belligerents did not stoutly maintain that they were fighting for justice, and in most cases the onlooker finds it a difficult problem to decide which, if either, is in the right. When we look at the two nations within each and every nation, however, the nation of the rich and the nation of the poor, we never can have any doubt as to which is the op- pressed and which the oppressor, as to which does the work and which gets the reward. Yet the fact that both rich and poor live within the same national borders blinds the sense of justice in many. If all the rich Americans lived abroad, as do William Waldorf Astor, W. K. Vanderbilt, the Countess de Castellane, and other well-known members of the various "American colonies," no doubt these blind ones might see that we have a nation of poor Americans who are subject to a nation of rich Americans. Suppose all our rich did emigrate, although still keeping their property and taking their rents and dividends, I would like to ask Mr. Eoosevelt if he would not then say that we Americans who remained on this side of the Atlantic were cowards if we did not end such a "peace of injustice." If it is plain that we would be cowards in this case, is it not equally true we are cowards to-day in submitting to a "peace of craven weakness, this peace of injustice," when we know that its continuance means that thousands of our fellow- 224 Socialism Inevitable countrymen must work and get nothing that other thousands may play and get everything? Surely this is the "peace of injustice" that Socialists are warring against, and if the President is sincere in striving for the goal of the "peace of justice" I would counsel him to begin at home and cast his lot with those who are warring for justice to the Nation of the Poor. The Inexorable Trust 225 THE INEXORABLE TRUST (February, 1905.) THE Evening Post of New York is one of those journals to which a considerable number of people look for guidance in their political and economic creeds. It sets itself up as an oracle upon all theories of political economy, and especially does it think itself "IT" when such subjects as the tariff, free silver and trusts are discussed. I am bound to say that its views are usually stated vigorously and to the point, and that it is not always wrong. However, upon the really vital question of the hour the trusts it hides itself in a cloud of words so that no man can tell where it stands, except that it thinks the disease is not so very bad, and that the best course would be to forego doctoring and let it wear itself out. Now, this is not a bad program, provided the patient doesn't die before the disease wears out; but upon such a contingency the Post utters no warning. As to the probability of the Trust wearing itself out with old age I would like to call the attention of the Post to the following item taken from its columns of a recent issue : The "irrepressible conflict," as one dealer termed it, which is taking place between the International Salt Company and the independent producers, has resulted not only in forcing the price far below the cost of production, with a consequent overproduc- tion of about 100 per cent., but in convincing the independents that they cannot engage in a campaign of the survival of the fittest unless they organize themselves. There is just now a great deal of talk among them of conferring with the Interna- tional Company for the purpose of making some sort of deal as to prices. But, as it was pointed out by a leading manufac- turer in this city, there is little hope of success even after a so-called organization of independents. When he was asked why, he replied: "For the very simple reason that some one in the organization is always ready to cut the price to get more than his share of the tonnage. That is history. It is a fact that there have been times when, at meetings of salt men to decide upon prices, some have not even waited for the meeting to close before going out to telegraph their houses to cut the prices just agreed upon. 226 Socialism Inevitable "The International Company is the aggressor in the campaign, and there is little doubt in my mind that it is at the bottom of this week's reduction of price, salt having declined to $1.50 per ton at the works, a drop of about 30 cents. One advantage the International has over the independents is that it supplies certain trades with mined salt, as well as producing evaporated salt, and it controls all the mines in operation in New York State. Also, it has large interests in the salt regions of Michigan, Kansas and Texas, where the independents do not enter. "The Michigan salt, however, is of inferior grade, and while it may be unloaded upon the East in such a way as to demoralize prices, it can do so only for a brief time, owing to its quality, or lack of it. The Michigan, Kansas and Texas stations can supply the Central West, and the International establishments at Wat- kins Glen, Ithaca and Warsaw, New York, are sufficiently great to supply the Eastern seaboard and the Middle States. As for the independents, their large evaporating plants at Akron, Wads- worth and Cleveland, Ohio, and Watkins, Leroy and Perry, New York, place them in a position to supply the entire Eastern trade and that of the Middle States. "So the situation is this: There are two factors capable of supplying the trade east of the Mississippi, and each is doing what it can to supply it. The consequence is an overproduction of about 100 per cent, and a very natural drop in the price. What remains to be seen now is how long the independents can stand the pace. With its profits on mined salt the International can probably pay the interest on its bonds, and it would seem, there- fore, that this company is in a position to fight the fight on these lines if it takes all winter. The independents do not hope to accomplish anything unless they get together and that very close and very earnestly." The International Salt Company, which has offices at 170 Broadway, is incorporated under New Jersey laws with a capital stock of $30,000,000. It has acquired the securities of the National Salt Company and its constituent concerns, and of the Retsof Mining Company, miners of rock salt. It also controls the In- ternational Salt Company of Illinois. Without dwelling upon this illogical absurdity which has it that the low price of salt has resulted in a consequent overproduction, instead of the very reverse being the case, I would like the Post to point out any other possible solution to what it calls the "irrepressible conflict" than the final birth of a Salt Trust. It must be remembered that the capitalists engaged m the salt business are engaged therein, not for the purpose of giving the dear public salt, as our political economists would have us believe, but for the purpose of making money. If it happens that they can earn more money by not making salt The Inexorable Trust 227 than by continuing its production, then it won't take them long to shut down their mines. There is now more salt being produced than the public can buy, even when it is sold at less than cost. Some people, of course, would have us believe that there is never over- production of a commodity when the selling price is not placed too much above cost. They seem to think the public buy upon the plan of paying only a fair profit, and that when the price is fixed at this figure the public will buy unlimited quantities; in fact just as much as is produced. Of course this is all rubbish. The public buy as little as they can get along with. I want just so much salt on my potatoes, and if salt were ten cents a ton I would not use a pinch more because it was cheap. However, there is a capacity in our salt mines to give us more salt in a week than we can use in a week. The salt was put in those mines to last man on this earth for the next million years ; so that we can easily produce beyond our needs. The salt manufacturers, in fact, are not concerned with the next million years ; they can make money only by mining salt right now in the Year of Our Lord 1905, and mine it they will if every man jack of them goes bankrupt, unless they can come to an agreement which will result in their making just as much money by reducing the output. The Post may say, "Very well, let the Kilkenny salt cats compete themselves to death; the community is the gainer, and the sooner such fools are off the earth the better." But it must be remembered that it's only the little salt fools that are exterminated; and the big International Salt Company, which is the aggressor in the struggle now going on, wishes this very result. When the fight is over it will be the sole survivor, and salt will be a commodity the mining of which will be a monopoly resting entirely in its hands. Now I should like to ask the omniscient Post if this is not an absolutely necessary outcome if the existing struggle be persisted in; and if so, wherein lies its solution of the Trust problem? Let the Trust wear itself out? That is absurd, for the Trust is the result of entirely natural conditions, and can no more wear itself out than ice can melt when the thermometer remains below zero. 228 Socialism Inevitable THE RIGHTS OF A WHEELBARROW (March, 1905.) THE way the President is absorbing the spirit of the times and the rapidity with which he is moving to- ward the Socialist position, is a gauge from which we may learn how quickly the whole nation is changing to a new viewpoint. The President speaks of "organized" capital and "organ- ized" labor. What does he really mean? What is capital? A wheelbarrow is capital. What is organized capital. A number of wheelbarrows, or cars, hauled by a steam engine over an iron roadbed is a railway, it is capital, it is "organized" capital. What rights has a wheelbarrow? Can it vote? What is labor? It is men. You say you will hire labor to build a house. What do you mean? You mean you will hire men. What is "organized" labor? It is men who have assembled for the purpose of systematically carrying out a certain industrial project. Suppose you were cast upon an island with one wheelbarrow and that some fine day the wheelbarrow should say to you, "See here, young man, you are Labor and I am Capital, and I wish you to understand that I have just as many rights as you have. In fact, I have more rights, for I have the right of doing nothing and being kept in good condition and well oiled, while you get nothing unless you work. You have no right to use me to wheel dirt or to do anything else until you get my permission." You say that only a man with a disordered brain would ever seriously think of a wheelbarrow having a personality, a few sticks of wood and an iron hoop as having rights. Very well. Then let us suppose that a ship is wrecked on your island and that the passengers and crew endeavor to simplify the problem of gaining a living by building all sorts of ingenious machinery. In other words, they become "organ- The Rights op a Wheelbarrow 229 ized labor" and the wheelbarrow is transformed into a rail- way and becomes "organized capital." Now you who laughed to scorn the idea of the wheelbarrow asserting its rights as Capital, what would you say to the railway asserting its rights as "organized capital"? Would you consider it just as absurd to talk of the rights of capital as of the rights of a wheelbarrow ? Hence, if you can see the absurdity of the rights of capital upon a hypothetical island, why can you not see the same absurdity when your President talks about the rights of cap- ital in your own country ? You may explain that he does not really mean rights of capital, but the rights of the men who own capital, or of the capitalists. I ask then if the man who owns capital has any rights that the man who does not own capital is not entitled to, and if so, is it not really capital that has the superior rights and not the capitalist ? Suppose the latter loses his capital in Wall street? August Belmont lost the Louisville & Nashville railway over night last winter when John W. Gates made his famous raid. Did not the rights which he held by virtue of his ownership depart with the capital ? Admitting this, can you still say that it is not capital, but the man who owns the capital, that has the rights ? The President, therefore, is not wrong in speaking of the rights of capital, for capital has rights which are very superior to the rights of man. But when he uses such phrases as "organized labor" and "organized capital" and puts them in antithesis as having respective rights, it means the near approach of the day when men will inquire, "Why should not Organized Capital be owned and controlled by Organized Labor? Then we will have no more of this absurd discus- sion about the rights of capital." 230 Socialism Inevitable WHAT IS RELIGION? (April, 1906.) SO long as commercial success is generally thought to better adapt the earth for man, so long will it give pleasure to those who pursue it. It is only when the com- mercial success of the individual becomes incompatible with the welfare of the race that the pursuit of wealth will become unendurable to those engaged in it. It is freely admitted that a great deal of the business success of to-day depends upon the limitation rather than the production of wealth. A trust insures profits by its ability to curtail production, but this is an accident of business rather than its normal course. How- ever, accidents of this nature are sure to become increasingly frequent as the capacity to consume becomes more and more limited, compared with the ability to produce. As this condition of affairs becomes more and more evident, it will come to pass in the natural course of events that men who have formerly been devoting their lives to the accumula- tion of wealth will have their energies diverted to the socializa- tion of wealth. That this is the case may be seen already in the actions of certain capitalists in the United States. It is said that during the last year more than $90,000,000 were distributed in various benefactions and charities, and it is well-known that Mr. Carnegie alone has given away altogether nearly a hundred million dollars. Of course all this charity and philanthropy is only a feeble indication of a social ten- dency, but it is a very striking one and should be duly appre- ciated. That the individual can attain complete happiness only by being in perfect accord with his environment is axiomatic. The individual, no matter how harmonious he may be in him- self, cannot be happy unless he has an environment which is harmonious. The boundary lines of one's environment are illimitable. A rich man's house may be pleasant and his family agreeable, What Is Religion? 231 but if his neighborhood is disagreeable it is evident that he is not in a favorable position for happiness. Again, though he should make his entire neighborhood conform to his ideas of beauty and happiness, he would still have to consider the city, and the city cannot be happy if the nation is unhappy. The task of the man who sets out to beautify his environment can be ended only when all the world is beautified. The happiness of the individual depends upon his being in harmony with a harmonious universe. The increasing sensitiveness of the nation as a whole was strikingly shown here in the United States when we felt ourselves impelled to demand that Spain should cease its persecution of Cuba, and this sentiment was one of the factors which finally led us into war. The same thing was seen again in the attitude of the United States toward Russia in regard to the Kishineff attrocities. Socialism then in its higher sense is the science of placing man in harmonious relation to a perfected universe. Coming back to the concrete, it is evident that one of the first steps toward this is the harmonious arrangement of things upon this earth that man may freely participate to the fullest extent in all the possibilities of his environment. The Social- ist demands that the worker shall have what he produces and sees that this demand can come only through the institution of a harmonious industrial system. But this attained he by no means considers that he has reached the end. Socialism is but a first step toward bringing man into a more perfect re- lation to the whole universe. There is no greater fallacy than to assume that because the Socialist sees that man must be fed before he can be happy, that he therefore imagines that the mere feeding of man is an end in itself. Feeding is simply a means to an end, and that end is the greatest that the mind of man can conceive the perfect relation of perfected man to a perfected universe the birth of the Super-Man. The striving for this is Religion. It is the true worship of God. 232 Socialism Inevitable w WE FEED OUR BUFFALOES BUT STARVE OURSELVES (April, 1905.) E Americans are all right when it comes to raising buffaloes, according to the following from the New York Commercial: The buffalo herd in Yellowstone Park, started by the United States Government and during the past few years very carefully watched to prevent the death of the young, is increasing rapidly, and will this year number between twenty and twenty-five more animals than a year ago at this time. The herd is in excellent condition. It has wintered well, and the calves are growing fast and appear to be sound and strong. It has been the wish of the government officers to increase the herd until it resembles the old-time herds which covered the western prairies. The ex- periment of propagating the animals is definitely a success, and the army officers, upon whom the work has largely devolved, are correspondingly pleased. Major Pitcher of the United States army represents the government in the park, and is practically and officially the custodian of the herd. The buffalo don't need to struggle for a living. Peed is good; the valleys give them splendid shelter, and they have the pick of grazing lands over which to roam. It's certainly very funny that our government can see the advantage of feeding its buffalo babies, fixing things so that "the buffalo don't have to struggle for a living when feed is good and plenty," and yet when it comes to fixing things for its voters' babies that it treats them so badly that the infant death-rate in New York and our other big Eastern cities beats the world. If the government can see that a buffalo baby needs good food and fresh air, why can it not see that human infants need good food and fresh air? If good food is necessary for buffaloes, why does Congress refuse to pass a pure food bill that would give men good food ? It's also interesting to note that the Federal army is used in this case to protect these animals, whereas its common purpose is to slaughter men. Is Socialism Puacticable? 233 IS SOCIALISM PRACTICABLE? (May, 1905.) JEFOEE deciding whether Socialism is practicable, we must first define Socialism: '^oJj^ajUuOt^^ "Socialism means the government ownership of p ays, factories, land and other instruments of production, j. the payment of wages upon the co-operative instead of upon the competitive system." \ In other words, instead of allowing Vanderbilt to own the railways and charge high freight and passenger rates, taking the profit to himself, Socialists say: Let the people own the railways and fix the rates on the basis of cost. Now nobody can say that it would be impracticable for our government to own and operate railways, since we do operate our postoffice, our lighthouses, our city fire depart- ments and our public schools. Excepting England, moreover, most other nations already operate their own railway systems. Is our American government less competent than Italy, Germany, Kussia, Japan? And if we now own and operate a railway in Panama, can we not own and operate one in Missouri? Furthermore, when we do operate our railways, can we not charge living and reasonable rates for freight and passengers instead of extortionate rates? But it may be said that, even admitting the government's ability to operate the railways, it does not follow that it can successfully operate a match factory, or a cigar factory, or a bakery. I cannot see why. In fact, all three of the industries named are already operated by certain governments abroad. Thus Eussia manufactures matches, Austria, cigars, and Italian cities bake bread in public bakeries. Now granting that public ownership is practicable, it may be asked what good will it accomplish? Socialists want public ownership because it is a necessary prerequisite to the co-operative payment of the workers; for with Kockefeller & Co. owning the nation, how can we have 234 Socialism Inevitable a Co-operative Commonwealth ? In short, to have co-operative distribution, we must have co-operative (government) owner- ship of the railways, factories and other means of production. Competition keeps us poor to-day. One laborer competes against another for a chance to work, and wages as a conse- quence are always kept down to the point where they provide only the mere necessities of life. Under competition, in- creased production benefits the capitalist, never the laborer, who, indeed, is frequently displaced by the machine and de- prived of employment. So that we find that an increase of production actually means less product for the worker, where- as under Socialism co-operation all would benefit as pro- duction is increased. To-day the United States is the richest country in the world. It has the power, not only to make all our own eighty million people free from want, but could support five hun- dred millions. Yet what do we find? Ten millions of our citizens are in abject poverty, and forty millions more are in the constant fear of poverty. Socialism affords us a plan of using what we can produce. Hence Socialism would abolish poverty. Viechow's Cell Theory 235 VIRCHOW'S CELL THEORY (May, 1905.) THE Tf ust is at once an abnormal and a normal develop- ment according as we may look upon it. It is ab- normal to the social system if we regard it as a cancer eating out the heart of society, abstracting to itself wealth that should go to all. It is normal, however, if we view it as the natural evolution of a system of competition which gives to the greedy rather than to the needy. The Trust, indeed, is the most perfect engine that greed has ever devised, and as we have been striving to perfect a machine to satisfy this greed, it is little wonder that we have finally invented an instrument that operates so auto- matically and with such intelligence that we are terrified at our Frankenstein, and now seek its destruction. It is, however, perfectly natural for a man to become greedy in an environment that threatens him with starvation if he does not grab. The most perfect-mannered gentleman in the world becomes a hog if failure to be a hog means death. Life, in fact, is merely adaptation to environment. As a cell in the body is repeatedly bruised, it demands more and more nutriment to restore its equilibrium. At first the result is a simple inflammation, but as the inflamed spot is injured again and again, the inflammation becomes chronic. Let the spot be further bruised, and it may become a cancer. In other words, the original cell which started out to heal itself from a temporary mishap by taking a little extra blood, has now become the malignant cancer cell threatening the whole body ; in short, has become a deadly foe. It was similarly that Kockefeller started out as a simple business man trying to save a few dollars to protect himself against old age, and acquired the habit of saving money. Surrounded as he was by a sea of deadly competition, he made deeper the channels which guided the protecting dollars to his savings bank. More and more money canie, and at the 236 Socialism Inevitable same time, more and more was needed to protect himself against his powerful competitors. Finally, however, came the trusts, and now money flows to him in a volume quite undreamed of even by himself a river of wealth which he has neither the will nor the power to divert. Eockefeller was once a healthy cell in our industrial organ- ism ; that he has become an abnormal one is not his fault, but due to the unhealthy state of the organism as a whole. To cure Eockefeller, we must not apply the remedy to him in- dividually, as would the Republicans and Democrats: we must apply it to society. To cure a boil, we do not get the best effects by local treatment. We seek to build up a de- bilitated system, of which the boil is a mere symptom. Eocke- feller is an effect, not a cause. To Professor Virchow is due the honor of having originated the modern theory of disease. His views have been briefly stated by Professor Legge as follows : Until Virchow's time it seemed to have been thought that disease was caused by some foreign substance inimical to life, seating itself within the tissues of the body, and thence pro- ceeding to conquer by degrees the whole organism. But Virchow showed that the process had been misinterpreted. The diseased structures of the body, he affirmed, consisted of cells like the healthy or undiseased, and these cells must once have sprung, as do all cells, from others. And as those parent cells can have, in their turn, no other origin than the original cell out of which the whole structure develops, it follows that the cells of diseased tissues must have developed in the normal way from the cells of the healthy tissues, "driven," as Lord Lister has said in this connection, to abnormal development by injurious agencies. Thus we see that the whole theory of disease is pushed further back, and that we must look for its origin, not in the diseased structure, but in the agency which caused the cells of the diseased structure to develop in an abnormal way. Let us see, for example, how this explains the morbid process called inflammation. It was once held that this in itself was a diseased condition of the part affected, and that the appropriate remedy was, as was said, to "reduce the inflammation by treating the local symptoms." But Virchow showed that the efficient cause must be an irritation of the local cells, which causes them, as does all irritation, to increase their own nutrition by sub- tracting from the blood and the neighboring tissue a greater supply than before of substance to be assimilated. Henceforward the congestion of blood in the inflamed part, and the consequent nervous and vascular disturbance, become a matter of very small Virchow's Cell Theory 237 importance for the cure. To find and remove the cause of the irritation of the cells is now the care of the pathologist, conscious as he must be that when this is done, all local symptoms may be trusted to cure themselves. Now just as it is the function of the scientific physician to seek the cause of disease when the individual man is affected, so should it be the function of the scientific politician to seek the cause of disturbance in the social organism. And this is not so hopeless as it might seem. The scientist is not essentially different from the modern man. He has simply had his attention directed to certain phenomena, and by careful study and observation has noted the relations existing between these phenomena. The first relations observed are, of course, very obvious, as that a bird has two legs, and that it belongs to an egg-laying species is but little more difficult. To discover that a bird's bones are much lighter than those of a non-flying animal of the same weight, however, takes con- siderably more powers of observation, although it does not indicate an unusually acute intellect. The same remark ap- plies to the discovery that the temperature of a bird's blood is higher than that of a mammal. And so on from step to step, the patient scientific investigator adds to his knowledge about birds, until he can finally enunciate general laws, which seem to require great ability on his part, but are, in reality, the result of his patience. To the ordinary man such a scientist seems a genius, but the latter has no such exalted opinion of himself. He knows only too well that it was by taking an infinite number of short steps that he attained his eminence. He knows that these steps taken one by one require only the intelligence of the average man, and that the great scientist is merely the ordinary man gifted with patience, and with a definite object to direct his steps. To-day there is no incentive to a politician to acquire a scientific knowledge of economics. It is not to knowledge that he owes his position, and too much, indeed, might easily cause his downfall. Many a man in modern life has come to realize with Galileo the danger of knowing too much. When the church had charge of astronomy it was heresy punishable with death to disagree with Ptolemy that the sun revolved around the earth; therefore the astronomers of that 238 Socialism Inevitable day were not very eager to advance other theories. There was, in fact, no demand for science in the field of astronomy : faith alone was wanted. To-day we are conducting our politics as astronomy, chemistry, and medicine were once conducted, on faith, not science and the result is that modern politicians know as much about the science of politics as the old-time astrologers knew of astronomy. Left at the Evening Post 239 LEFT AT THE "SATURDAY EVENING POST' (June, 1905.) With a suddenness that must he startling to those who note only the surface of events, Socialism has become a factor in our moral, political and industrial life. The Socialist vote for Presi- dent last fall attracted a good deal of attention more, perhaps, than in itself it deserved hut it was in no way a measure of the importance of the Socialist movement. And year by year, as science compels consolidations and co-operations on a scale im- possible in the past, the collectivist proposals formulated by the German Jew, Karl Marx, out of the theorizings of the great French economists of the eighteenth century, are bound to re- ceive more and more attention. Whatever one believes about it, he must inform himself. For, while Mark Hanna's prediction that Socialism would be the storm center of the next great political battle in this country seemed exaggerated when he made it a few years ago, his far- sightedness is already vindicated. To fight for Socialism, you must understand it, to fight against Socialism, you must under- stand it. WHEN I read the above in the Saturday Evening Post, I, naturally, came to the conclusion that Mr. Lorimer, the editor, meant what he said. I thought he was anxious that his readers should learn what Socialism really means. He certainly says so plainly enough. He advises them that, whether they are for or against Social- ism, it is necessary that they should be properly informed about it. Furthermore, he did not attempt to tell them what it is, and thereby rose still higher in my estimation, for it is a wise man who knows what he doesn't know. Regarding Mr. Lorimer's editorial, therefore, as an in- vitation to spread the doctrine of Socialism before the eyes of his readers, I prepared a modest little advertisement of Wilshire's Magazine for the Post, and requested its insertion at the usual rates. It read about as follows : SOCIALISM ! Bead it up ! Ten cents for a whole year. .WILSHIRE'S MAGAZINE, New York. 240 Socialism Inevitable To my surprise the advertisement was refused. I say to my surprise, Because the same advertisement was readily taken by other magazines, such as The Outlook, The Independent, Success, Public Opinion, The Literary Digest, etc. I inquired for the reason of the turndown, offering to change the word- ing ; but the Post replied that they "did not like the theme," which meant there was no loophole for Wilshire to enter. Of course, all this is merely a surprising exhibition of busi- ness stupidity by people who, though usually considered quite up-to-date, are so out of touch with the movement of the times that they do not know that the word "Socialism" is no longer a bogy to scare away readers and advertisers. The Post did not reject the advertisement because it is opposed to Socialism, for the Post is not opposed to anything that does not affect its pocketbook. It simply classes the word Socialism or the "theme," as it calls it with Hypnotism, Matrimony, Astrology, Clairvoyancy and other such words which are used in connection with certain advertisements that the publishing world dubs as "bad copy." By this is meant copy that tends to lower the tone of the publication, and causes the withdrawal of higher-class advertisements, such as automobiles, etc. But the Post is learning things, for I have in hand this moment its edition of May 13th, with its leading editorial upon the Chicago election. It is certainly significant of the trend of public opinion to see it speak so favorably of "municipal ownership." The cat has jumped, and the Post at last knows which way to run. It says: "Voters of all cities everywhere are ali in sympathy with Chicago. The people must reclaim their streets." It will some day say they must reclaim not only their streets but all their wealth. It's a step from municipal ownership to national ownership, and only another step from national ownership to Socialism. And so I have hopes that after we have Socialism the Post may let me use the word in its sacred columns. Who knows ? The- Ten-Hour Decision 241 THE TEN- HOUR DECISION (June, 1905.) THE Supreme Court of the United States, by a vote of five to four, has decided that the New York State law, limiting the workday for bakers to ten hours, is un- constitutional. The general view taken by the majority of the court is that such a law, by preventing a man working as long as he chooses, is not only a curtailment of his liberty, but is an infringement upon his property rights. The court assumes that a man's body is his own private property, to do with it as he may please, and that any denial of his right to use it for more than ten hours a day is virtually an in- fringement upon the divine right of private property. The court scouted the idea that the bill was intended to protect either the health of the bakers or of the bread-eating public. Whereas Justice Harlan, in voicing the dissenting minority, pleaded that the bill was unquestionably a "health bill" and, therefore, within the police power of the State, hence that the federal government had no right to interfere. It may here be stated that eight-hour laws in Kansas and Utah, limiting the time for miners, have been declared valid by the United States Supreme Court, on the ground that more than eight hours' work underground is unhealthful, and that the States consequently had the right to pass such laws. It would appear, then, that any law limiting the work- day must show, to be valid, that it protects the health of the workers ; their leisure or pleasure being unimportant. This is a pretty fine distinction. I have no doubt that if good Justice Peckham, of the Honorable Supreme Court of the United States, should be compelled to make his living by kneading bread in the ordinary hot, bad-smelling, under- ground bakery in New York City, he would revise his opinion that ten hours of such work are not too long for one's health, and come to the conclusion that ten minutes would be more than enough for him. 242 Socialism Inevitable From the Socialist standpoint, however, the view taken by the majority of the Supreme Court is sound; that is, con- stitutionally sound. The makers of our constitution cer- tainly never thought of any such future for this country, as is seen to-day, where the lack of ownership of property would make the mass of the people dependent upon a small class of landlords. In former days land was the only property of any account, and yet it could be had on the western frontier for the ask- ing. Therefore, if a man did not like the wages prescribed by his employer, he could break in a farm on the public domain and become his own boss. Under such conditions, and our forefathers thought they would be permanent, it would unquestionably have been a very direct infringement upon a man's liberty to pass a law preventing him working as long as he pleased. But those primitive conditions are not the conditions of to-day, although the Supreme Court assumes that they are, as it is probably bound to do. To-day not only does a small minority own all the land, but all the tools necessary to work the land and bring the product to market. Hence, even if a man did have free access to the land, which formerly was the opportunity of all, he would still be in economic servitude to the capitalists who own the necessary machinery to work the land. In our grandfathers' time the "necessary machinery" meant an axe, a hoe, and a log-cabin, all of which were easy of in- dividual production and ownership. To-day "necessary ma- chinery" means a combined reaper and harvester, made by a hundred-million-dollar trust, a hundred-million-dollar railway to haul the wheat to market, a million-dollar elevator to unload it, a million-dollar mill to grind it into flour, and, finally, a hundred-million-dollar trust to bake it into biscuits for all America. Now it is self-evident that there are not, and cannot be, enough million-dollar trusts to allow every man to own his own trust. In fact, the essential idea of a trust is not so much the organization of property as it is the organization of men. It is as absurd to think of every man owning his own trust, no matter how much wealth there may be, as it is to think of every private soldier being a general in the The Ten-Hour Decision 243 army. And yet, if you don't own your own trust, you must, when you wish to gain your living, go to some one who does own a trust, and beg for permission to use it ; in other words, you must beg him for a job. It may be that you will approach the Biscuit Trust, which will tell you that all its employees work eleven hours a day, and that it can give you a position only on condition of your working the regulation number of hours. Hence, as you are hungry, and no other trust will offer anything better, you accept the conditions and work the eleven hours a day. But perhaps, after you have worked for a few years, you and your fellow bakers organize and send up a delegation to the State capitol and succeed in persuading the legislature to pass a law limiting the workday for bakers to ten hours a day. Then suppose, after your great legislative victory, that the court should set the law aside because it infringes upon your right to work for eleven hours a day ! And still that decision might be strictly "constitutional." Now, what are you going to do about it? It is stupid to say you will change the membership of the Supreme Court. The judges are there for life, and none resign; anyway, they have only said that black is black, and you should not demand that they say black is white, merely because you don't want to work eleven hours a day. Or maybe you will think of amending the constitution? After you look into the matter and see what a gigantic task that would be, I think you will likewise give up that idea. It would be about as difficult to amend the constitution of the United States, in such a way as to make a ten-hour bill constitutional, as it would be for Kockefeller to get a pass into heaven from the Eeverend Washington Gladden. But you say you must find some way out. Here you are a citizen of the richest country under the sun. You can pro- duce more wealth in a minute with your modern machinery than your grandfather could, one hundred years ago, in an hour, and yet your Supreme Court says no matter how much you can produce with your labor-saving inventions, you must still work eleven hours a day. If there is any labor to be saved, it is evidently not to be your labor, not if the court knows itself. One hundred years ago your grandfather worked eleven hours a day : to-day you 244 Socialism Inevitable produce sixty times as much and you must also work eleven hours a day. One hundred years hence the progress of in- vention may quadruple your present product, but you or your descendants must still buckle down to that inexorable eleven-hour workday. You know, furthermore, that the in- creased product does not mean increased pay for you. You are paid according to how cheap the Trust can get some other fellow to take your place. What you produce has nothing to do with your pay. If you are a baker, and an automatic kneading machine is installed, increasing the product ten times and thereby allow- ing the Trust to discharge nine out of its ten bakers, do you think the lucky tenth man who is kept will regard it as an opportune time to ask for more pay? Not when he thinks of those nine men just let out, every one of whom wants to get back at any wage that will feed him. Indeed you may well despair if you look upon existing conditions of trust ownership as permanent. But did you never think of the possibility of a change from private to public ownership ? Distribution the Problem 245 DISTRIBUTION THE PROBLEM (July, 1905.) IT is especially the province of this journal to publish the fact that whereas we Americans, as a nation, have made immense progress during the past fifty years in the power of rapidly producing wealth, we have made no corresponding advancement in our methods of distributing that wealth to the working class, who, by the aid of modern machinery produce it. The editor has also not neglected to point out that this failure of the working class to get what it produces is owing entirely to the fact that it does not own this machinery, which we may broadly define as our railways, steamships, oil re- fineries, steel mills, cotton and woolen factories, flour mills, etc., in other words, what we mean when we say capital. And of course we include in this broad definition of capital, both our dwelling houses and the land upon which houses, railways, mills and factories stand. These various forms of capital are to-day owned almost exclusively by certain corporations, which, owing to their great size, are essentially monopolistic in their character, and hence are generally known and designated under the name of Trusts. If, then, the workers owned the Trusts it would practically mean their owning the machinery of production ; and the only feasible way this can be brought about is through the medium of the government, the nation. If the government owned the Trusts it would mean that each and every citizen would have an equal and joint ownership in all capital, and an equal right to use the same for his own benefit, without the necessity of paying rent, profit or interest for such use to Astor, Rocke- feller, Eothschild & Co. Hence we have adopted as the shibboleth of this magazine the words, "Let the Nation Own theJTrusie," as expressing in the shortest manner possible wKafwe are fighting for, the reason for our journalistic existence. 246 Socialism Inevitable Now the only way to establish this ownership is for all who wish capital to be thus collectively owned by the nation, to assist and vote for the Soeia-List-Earty, the only party that clearly and unqualifiedly demands such complete government ownership. While we jnay_jwnc ede that a p ar M: ow nership of capital by the State, such as municipal ownership of gas and waterworks, street cars, etc., and the national ownership of railroads, is somewhat better than no public ownership at all, yet we unhesitatingly declare that the advantages of such partial public ownership are so slight when compared with complete public ownership that no one who has read and fully understands the foregoing, especially one who calls himself a Socialist, can justify himself in voting for a partial measure when he has an opportunity to vote for complete ownership through the Socialist Party. Now so long as any capital whatever remains under private ownership, those who control that capital can demand tribute from the workers for its use, and thus perpetuate the present regime for exploiters and exploited. The emancipation of labor, in fact, can be accomplished only when all capital is owned by labor. That this fundamental proposition is quite lost sight of and misunderstood by such advocates of municipal and national ownership as Mr. Hearst can be seen from the following striking and suggestive editorial taken from the New York American, of June 7th: THE WONDERFUL STORY OF MODERN PROGRESS. Somewhere in the body of some human being there is lying a germ that will produce a brain able to emancipate the whole of mankind from all kinds of slavery except that which comes wholly from superstition and ignorance. It will be the brain of a chemist, not that of a warrior, a states- man or an artist. Human slavery exists because a few control the necessaries of human life that are indispensable to the multitude. Invent a scheme by which all may secure the necessaries of life, and money will no longer be able to control the terms on which we must labor for food, clothes and shelter. If one by twenty days' pleasant work in the Spring and Fall could secure food, clothes and shelter for the year, it would be hard to induce him to labor twelve hours a day in the Subway or fourteen hours daily in a sweatshop. Is such a thing possible? Distribution the Problem 247 Certainly, and it is nearer consummation than most of us imagine. A hundred thousand of the .greatest men in the world are working along the lines of such a discovery, and the strides in advance they have made during the last twenty years have put behind them a greater space than remains in front of them. Let us glance at a few that have come to the notice of the people through the daily press. Production of butter or cheese quintupled by the selection of suitable cows. Chinchona trees by selection forced to yield forty times the normal amount of quinine. Wheat and corn forced by selection to triple the product of each ear. Clover and legumes by inoculation with benign bacilli forced to gather from the air ten times the usual amount of nitrogen. Fruit pests destroyed by other insects. Germany, short of fuel, forces her soil to produce twice the common crop of potatoes that will secrete four times the usual amount of alcohol. Meat and other foods saved from spoiling by the inventions of Pasteur. Artificial germination of marine animals by Loeb. Percentage of sugar in cane and beets multiplied fourfold. Twelve years' needed growth of an edible nut reduced to eighteen months by Burbank, the greatest living man, who, after wasting a life on fruits and flowers, is beginning to devote his gigantic mind to lowering the cost of a food supply. Greatest of all the discovery that an atom is not an atom, but the smallest of atoms is made up of seven hundred electrons and an ion. A few common elements compose all things. We know how to make a beefsteak out of a barrowful of dirt and a few tiny seeds. When we can dispense with the aid of the cow and make the steak direct out of the sulphur, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorous and hydrogen that are its chief elements, we will not have to work in sweatshops. When we can make electricity from common hydrocarbons direct, we will not have to pay five cents for a ride in the Sub- way. The secret is almost within our reach; a hundred or more of the chemists have it nearly within their grasp. It is not a folly, like the philosopher's stone, but a certainty to those who have faith. What will there be left to do when food and shelter are prac- tically free? Plenty! There is disease to conquer, vice to eradicate, pain to eliminate, and all evil to be put out of the world, and when that is done no doubt those who are living will find something to be looked after. 248 Socialism Inevitable Mr. Hearst seems to think the reason poverty exists is owing to the fact that man does not produce enough. He looks to the emancipation of mankind by some heaven-born chemist who will show us how to make beef-steak direct from the original elements, carbon and nitrogen, without any refer- ence to the cow. He goes even further and says that no statesman will have a hand in the emancipating of mankind. Now this is exactly one of the points wherein we differ from Mr. Hearst. Already chemists and other scientists have demonstrated how easily we can produce enough to abolish poverty; but no statesman has as yet appeared who has been able to tell the workingman how he may keep what he pro- duces. Mr. Hearst says, "Human slavery exists because a few control the necessaries of life." This, of course, is true; but he should have explained that the few have this control because they own the land and the capital whereby these necessaries are produced. If Burbank were to invent a walnut tree that develops in eighteen months as fast as an ordinary walnut tree does in ten years, then the owner of the land upon which the tree is planted, makes the gain, if there is any, and not the working-class, which owns no walnut groves. We say if there is any gain, for we know that competition between the owners of walnut groves will soon be so keen that it will not be long before there will be overproduction of walnuts as of everything else, after which the only gainers will be the trusts. The funniest and most absurd prediction that Mr. Hearst makes is that the direct production of electricity from coal will reduce the five-cent rates on the New York Subway. The American has printed dozens and dozens of editorials showing by the published statements of the company, that the cost per passenger is now only two cents, and that the five- cent rate is the result of the private ownership of the subway by Mr. Belmont. But if the direct production of electricity were to reduce the cost of carrying each passenger one cent, does Mr. Hearst think that Mr. Belmont would be more likely to reduce fares or put the cent in his pocket ? We do not wish to be too hard on Mr. Hearst for this lapse, for we know that it is an error of one of his young men, Mr. Hearst is now in Europe and cannot revise every Distribution the Problem 249 editorial, and Mr. Brisbane has so much of his time taken up with the Evening Journal that he cannot look after the morning edition. Mr. Hearst, in fact, has so often declared municipal ownership to be the remedy for Belmont's extortion, that it would be unfair for us to take him up for what is evidently a mistake of a sub-editor. Nevertheless, the main indictment against Mr. Hearst and the other advocates of municipal ownership stands: namely, that municipal owner- ship itself is at best but a reform measure, and does not touch the fringe of the problem of poverty. Poverty exists because the capitalist class own the machinery necessary for the production of the means of life, and thus make the working-class their dependants, virtually their slaves. The municipal ownership of street cars, even if the qity should make transportation absolutely free, would not tend to abolish poverty any more than does free transportation upon the elevators in an office sky-scraper. Free street cars would simply mean higher rent in the suburbs, just as a free elevator means more rent on the top floors. The landlord skims the cream every time. Municipal ownership of street cars will, of course, conduce to better service, cheaper fares, better wages and conditions of work for the employees, and to the elimination of the cor- ruption of our Alderman by the street car lobby, and especially to the education of the general public in the control of an industrial function. All this is to the good, but it is not the abolition of poverty, nor is it Socialism ; and while we recog- nize and admit the good of municipal ownership, yet we must at the same time point out the impossibility of anyone right- fully claiming to be a Socialist who votes for a reform such as municipal ownership at the expense of the Socialist Party. A Socialist should always vote for his own party. This is the only way for him to make a positive and unequivocal declaration that he wishes to have Socialism instituted. 250 Socialism Inevitable THE MUTATION THEORY APPLIED TO SOCIETY September, 1905.) WHEN one states that it is one's theory that the final move of society will be in the nature of a leap rather than a slow and steady progression through the successive municipalization and nationalization of public utilities until all wealth is finally nationalized, one is often condemned as being unscientific, and no true follower of the theory of evolution. Now to be called unscientific is about the greatest insult that can be hurled at a Socialist j but at the same time he has acknowledged a certain justice in the criticism whenever he feels that he has failed clearly to demonstrate that the same laws which govern the evolutionary development of plants and animals also hold in the development of the social organism of man, of society. If, for instance, it be admitted that the development of the deer or the elephant in its present form and shape from lower forms of life is the result of the .slow and steady progress of natural selection extending over millions of years, why is it not logical to insist that the move from the present competitive man-eating-man society of to- day to a state of brotherly love and co-operation must also require the slow progress of the centuries ? It was no particular comfort for the evolutionary, yet revolutionary, Socialist to hear that the researches of Geikie, Lord Kelvin, and other scientists, showed that the time re- quired by the theory of Darwin for the development of the higher types of animals and plants, time mounting into the thousands of millions of years, was simply impossible, because for the greater part of this period it was impossible for the earth to have been in a condition cool enough for life to exist. A thousand million years ago, in fact, the earth was an in- candescent glowing sun. Notwithstanding this objection of the geologists, however, The Mutation Theory Applied to Society 251 as well as the absence of certain important links which the theologians have not failed to point out, and which Darwin- ists have never been able to account for, the scientific proofs of an evolutionary descent were so positive that the educated world generally became convinced of its truth. And now all these faults are at last to be remedied if the mutation theory of progress is adopted instead of the theory held by Darwin of a slow and almost imperceptible progress. Those holding to the mutation, or "jump" theory, think progress from species to species to have been made, not by a slow process, but by sudden and unexpected jumps. Just as if, for instance, there being no deer'ln the world, that the cows of a certain herd should suddenly and unexpectedly give birth to a number of young animals resembling deer instead of calves, and that these animals should then interbreed with themselves, and so give rise to a new species to deer. That species should have originated in this manner, with- out apparent reason, would have been as difficult of acceptance by the early Darwinians as the story of the creation of woman from Adam's rib. Nevertheless a number of recent experi- , ments upon the lower forms of life have shown conclusively that there, at any rate, one species may, byjifiing placed in a new environment, give rise to a totally new and different species; and if this may happen among the lower species, there is possibly no sound reason why it may not happen among the higher. A very interesting paper was recently read before the Koyal Society, in London, by Dr. H. C. Bastian, who is a supporter of this theory of the production of one form of life from another, whereas most biologists hold to the hypothesis of homogenesis, or the production of a given form of life from the same form. Dr. Bastian has shown, however, says W. E. Garrett Fisher, in the London Mail, by an experiment anyone can repeat, that one form of life does at times give rise to a totally distinct form, under the influence of purely physical conditions. His experiment is as striking, though it deals only with microscopic and lowly forms of life, as if a hen's egg were found, under special conditions of incubation, to give birth to a duckling. Says Mr. Fisher: When the eggs of a common "wheel animalcule," the Hydatina, which is found in the stagnant water of many ponds and ditches, 252 Socialism Inevitable are allowed to germinate in small stone pots from which both light, and certain invisible rays, which seem to play a part in the process, are excluded, Dr. Bastian finds that some of them invariably give birth to a different kind of animalcule. The Hydatina is a multicellular organism, which belongs to a class, the rotifera, holding a place of its own in the zoological scheme. When its eggs give birth to the ciliated infusoria, which Dr. Bastian has obtained from them in many instances, we have off- spring of a perfectly distinct nature from the parent. These infusoria belong to the simplest class of living animals, the protozoa, each of which consists of a single cell. Their bodies are not differentiated into parts as is the case with all higher forms including the parent Hydatina but the solitary cell has to perform all the functions of vitality. To a biologist the case is just as remarkable as if a cat gave birth to a sparrow, or a hen's egg produced a frog. It is a clear case of the trans- mutation of life, corresponding closely enough to the transmuta- tion of radium-emanation into helium. To the lay student of the problems of life this remarkable discovery has a two-fold interest. In the first place, it helps us to understand how all the wonderful varieties of life which now people the globe may have developed, within the somewhat limited time which physicists allow for the operation, from the primordial germs. In the second place, the fact of the transmu- tation of life, once established, throws some light on the ques- tion of its origin. That heterogenesis is also a method of progress among plants is being every day made clearer and clearer; and that the same applies to all life will surely be accepted in the course of time. To Professor Hugo De Vries the world is most indebted for its knowledge of the facts as to plants in relation to this profoundly interesting and far-reaching theory. His book "Species and Varieties, Their Origin by Mutation," marks, in its way, the greatest step forward we have had since the publication of Darwin's epoch-making "Origin of Species." It lights up many of the dark places in the Darwinian theory. As the author says : A grave objection which has often and from the very outset been urged against Darwin's conception of very slow and nearly imperceptible changes, is the enormously long time required. If evolution does not proceed any faster than what we can see at present, and if the process must be assumed to have gone on in the same slow manner always, thousands of millions of years would have been needed to develop the higher types of animals and plants from their earliest ancestors. Now, it is not at all probable that the duration of life on earth The Mutation Theory Applied to Society 253 includes such an incredibly long time. Quite on the contrary, the lifetime of the earth seems to be limited to a few millions of years. The researches of Lord Kelvin and other eminent physicists seem to leave no doubt on this point. Of course, all estimates of this kind are only vague and approximate, but for our present purposes they may be considered as sufficiently exact. In a paper published in 1862 Sir William Thomson (now Lord Kelvin) first endeavored to show that great limitations had to be put upon the enormous demands for time made by Lyell, Darwin and other biologists. From a consideration of a secular cooling of the earth, as deduced from the increasing temperature in deep mines, he concluded that the entire age of the earth must have been more than twenty and less than forty millions of years, and probably much nearer twenty than forty. His views have been much criticized by other physicists, but in the main they have gained an ever-increasing support in the way of evidence. New mines of greater depth have been bored, and their temperatures have proved that the figures of Lord Kelvin are strikingly near the truth. George Darwin has calculated that the separation of the moon from the earth must have taken place some fifty-six millions of years ago. Geikie has estimated the existence of the solid crust of the earth at the most as a hundred million years. The first appearance of the crust must soon have been succeeded by the formation of the seas, and a long time does not seem to have been required to cool the seas to such a degree that life became possible. It is very probable that life originally com- menced in the great seas, and that the forms which are now usually included in the plankton or floating-life included the very first living beings. According to Brooks, life must have existed in this floating condition during long primeval epochs, and involved nearly all the main branches of the animal and vegetable kingdom before sinking to the bottom of the sea, and later producing the vast number of diverse forms which now adorn the sea and land. All these evolutions, however, must have been very rapid, especially at the beginning, and together cannot have taken more time than the figures given above. The agency of the larger streams, and the deposits which they bring into the seas, afford further evidence. The amount of dis- solved salts, especially sodium chloride, common salt, has been made the subject of a calculation by Joly, and the amount of time has been estimated by Eugene Dubois. Joly found fifty- five and Dubois thirty-six millions of years as the probable age of the rivers, and both figures correspond to the above as closely as might be expected from the discussion of evidence so incom- plete and limited. All in all it seems evident that the duration of life does not comply with the demands of the conception of very slow and continuous evolution. Now, it is easily seen that the idea of successive mutations is quite independent of this difficulty. Even 254 Socialism Inevitable assuming that some thousands of characters must have been acquired in order to produce the higher animals and plants of the present time, no valid objection is raised. The demands of the biologists and the results of the physicists are harmonized on the ground of the theory of mutation. The steps may be surmised to have never been essentially larger than in the mutations now going on under our eyes, and some thousands of them may be estimated as sufficient to account for the entire organization of the higher forms. Granting be- tween twenty and forty millions of years since the beginning of life, the intervals between two successive mutations may have been centuries and even thousands of years. As yet there has been no objection cited against this assumption, and hence we see that the lack of harmony between the demands of biologists and the result of the physicists disappears in the light of the theory of mutation. Summing up the results of this discussion, we may justifiably assert that the conclusions derived from the observations and experiments made with evening-primroses and other plants in the main agree satisfactorily with the inferences drawn from paleontologic, geologic and systematic evidence. Obviously these experiments are wonderfully supported by the whole of our knowledge concerning evolution. For this reason the laws dis- covered in the experimental garden may be considered of great importance, and they may guide us in our further inquiries. Without doubt many minor points are in need of correction and elaboration, but such improvements of our knowledge will grad- ually increase our means of discovering new instances and new proofs. The conception of mutation periods producing swarms of species from time to time, among which only a few have a chance of survival, promises to become a basis for speculative pedigree-diagrams, as well as for experimental investigations." Professor De Vries finds that Lamarck's evening primrose is at least one flower that is to-day constantly mutating, that is, its seeds produce plants quite different from the parent primroses, and of a different kind, and that these new prim- roses continue the deviation in their progeny. This conduct of the primrose seems to be unique among plants; but very probably when further and closer investiga- tions are made, other plants will be found to be also con- stantly mutating. Certainly it would seem that if one plant can mutate, all can. " ' ' > As to animals, there is no direct evidence that they have mutated, that is, there are no data of the young of any certain animal being so different as to constitute a new species, whereas, on the other hand, circumstantial evidence seems The Mutation Theory Applied to Society 255 to point to a development by slow degrees. Cows have cer- tainly never been known to bring forth deer, for instance, but because nothing like this has been noted in the present, there seems no reason to think that it has never happened in the past or may never happen in the future. There are many missing links in the chain that leads us to the little five-toed animal which was the great-great- grandpa, several million years ago, of the horse to-day ; and it is just as likely that many of these missing links means so many mutations in the evolutionary progress of the horse. That is, that the reason no links or steps are found is simply because there were none. Nature may have skipped a few steps. The theory of natural selection does not attempt to give a reason for the birth of a new species. A new species spon- taneously appears, and if it is the fittest to live, then natura" selection, which is merely a sieve, determines that fact, so that it survives, while others less fit die. The new variety or species may or may not be a step higher in development. It may be a step backward. No douht the tapeworm, which now can live only as a parasite, had, far enough back, a very self-respecting, hard-working worm for its grandfather, who made his own living in the open, without thinking of harbor- ing himself inside a man or dog in order to get his living without work ; just as many an idle capitalist of to-day is the son of a workingman of yesterday. To account for the appearance of certain species of animals by any theory of an imperceptibly slow variation through the workings of natural selection is quite impossible. For in- stance, take the giraffe, which, owing to its long neck, can browse off the branches of trees quite out of reach of other animals. Now, if the first giraffe had a neck only a foot or so longer than this short-necked parent, it would not have been a bit better off than with an ordinary neck. It was three-foot neck or nothing for it; mutate, or no grazing on the high trees ! The same with the Australian ant-eater, which has such an extraordinarily long tongue that it can reach ants in the most secure ant hill. That tongue had to be very long, to say nothing of its being very glutinous, or it would have been no improvement at all on a short tongue. It is certainly 256 Socialism Inevitable much more comfortable to have a mutation theory to explain such jumps than to confess you cannot explain it at all. However, to get back to the mutation theory as applied to the evolution of the organism of human society. While no- body, probably, will ever be able to explain why a primrose mutates, since nobody Can understand why its cells prefer to organize one way more than another, yet when we come to the question of explaining why human society mutates, we have a different problem. Society has had revolutions in e past, it has mutated from feudalism to capitalism, and Socialists say it must mutate from capitalism to Socialism. And the reason we can speaTE so certainly here is that we ourselves are the cells and know why we move from this place to that ; and why we organized in the past this form of gov- ernment in Russia and that form of government in America ; and why we must re-organize our governments in the future upon new lines. Looking back, to-day, over the pages of history we can often understand why men and nations had to act just as they did ; yet we know that at the time the actions were taking place the people of the day attributed the deeds largely to the free will of man. The French Revolution at one time was, and, in fact, even yet, is thought by many good people to have been the work of a few bloodthirsty demons leading on a bloodthirsty mob. Nowadays we have the perspective of a century to aid our vision, and we can see that, taking things as they were, the results were just about as they must have been. To-day we have Miss Tarbell painting Rockefeller as the arch enemy of society, a Danton, Marat and Robespierre rolled into one, as the man who first brought iniquity into business, and who is responsible for the whole corruption in our national life, and particularly as the man who has trans- formed competition into monopoly. And what is more to the point, Miss Tarbell undoubtedly reflects the opinion of thousands of her readers. In reality, however, Rockefeller is merely the product of our competitive system, and if he had not been born, we would have had some one else who would have performed the same task of consolidating the industries of the country. In a hundred years from to-day there will be sufficient perspective, and enough loss of prejudice, for even the Miss Tarbells to form a proper estimate of Rockefeller, The Mutation Theory Applied to Society 25? who is merely a cell in our social organism, which, through a fault in the organism itself, is being over-fed. The result is that at present he has an undue and disagreeable prominence in the national economy, just like the over-fed cell in a man's body which has become a wart on his nose. We don't blame the wart ; why should we blame Eockefeller ? We know what a wart is, and we know how to remove it. The Socialists know that Rockefeller is merely a wart, and that the simplest way to cure it is to absorb it. Let the Nation Absorb Eocke- feller. Now Rockefeller showed us how to force the competitive business man to mutate jump from competition to mo- nopoly, at the very time when all the scientists and political economists were gravely proving the impossibility of what Rockefeller was doing with such ease. But it was no miracle, nor was Rockefeller either a god or a devil. The conditions of business had changed, and this not only allowed him to transform competition into monopoly, but actually forced him to do so. To Rockefeller a change was a matter of life or death, just as it is when the puddle dries up, to the tadpole, which must straightway develop lungs and breathe air as a frog, or die because his tadpole gills are no longer of use. With Rockefeller there was no opportunity for half-way meas- ures, no chance for half competition or half monopoly, any more than there was with the tadpole partly to use gills and partly lungs. It was mutate or die, and mutate instantly, too, for both. Society must jump from capitalism to Socialism in much the same manner. The capitalist will persist in building up the industrial plant to the highest degree of perfection, he will give employment to all up to the last, and then, suddenly, he will find that it will not pay him to build another factory or another railway. There will be a huge unemployed problem, and then like a bolt from the blue, will come the crash, leaving society to mutate into Socialism or die. Furthermore, it will be a question of "do it now." The tadpole had to get very busy changing into a frog, for he could not last very long without air, since it was no lungs, no air; and man will have to get just as busy, for he cannot last very long without food, and it will be, no Socialism, no food. Now it must not be thought that an adherence to the mu- 258 Socialism Inevitable tation theory in either biology or sociology excludes a belief in progress by slow changes. Not at all : there is progress by slow stages and there is also progress by jumps. Countless changes occur in plants and animal life, some imperceptibly small and some extraordinarily large. Those changes which better adapt the organism to live are filtered out by the sieve of Natural Selection, and so are perpetuated. At the present time we simply know that such changes occur, but why is a mystery. Why they continue is easily explainable : they live because they are the fittest to live. In society, however, we can not only explain why certain changes persist, for natural selection quite accounts for it, but we can also explain why the changes occur, and can even positively predict their appearance. Give a people a certain economic environment for a sufficient time, and it is as sure to develop a certain political life, as an apple tree is to bear apples when planted in the right soil and climate. When Luther Burbank wishes to develop a new fruit he plants thousands of seeds, and then, out of the thousands of progeny, he may find one plant that he thinks worth preserv- ing. He makes a bonfire of the rejected. Now if he does not find the plant he wishes he repeats the process next season, and so keeps it up until at last he gets just what he wants. This is artificial selection, that is, selection of the fittest according to what man thinks best rather than selection by nature of what can best survive in competition with other plants.. Burbank now promises us a thornless, edible cactus which will allow a man to use the deserts for his food supply. Such a plant, of course, could have been developed only by artificial selection, for a thornless cactus in the desert with hungry, grazing animals all about would hardly be able to demonstrate its fitness to survive. For the very reason that a cactus with- out thorns is the fittest to eat, gives it, in Nature's opinion, the least chance of living and propagating its kind. In to-day's competitive strife the man who is the fittest to live is not the soundest, sweetest and most beautiful fruit on the tree of humanity, but the one with the most thorns, the thickest skin and hardest heart. Nevertheless, just as Burbank has shown us that the most thorny cactus may develop into the least thorny one when the necessity for thorns has passed The Mutation Theory Applied to Society 259 away, so we may look for man also to drop his thorns, when the competition which makes them necessary has forever disappeared. In fact, Burbank himself has recently said that just as wonderful changes might be made in man as he is making in flowers, if only the children were as carefully reared and protected as are the plants in his California nursery. How wretchedly we are caring for our children to-day may be judged by the following from a recent issue of the New York Sun: The health authorities under the direction of Dr. Herman Biggs have just completed a very important investigation into the health of some of the school children of this city, which has shown a prevalence of disease exceeding their expectations. The figures compiled by the medical inspectors and now in Dr. Bigg's possession show that out of almost 14,000 children examined more than 6,000, or almost half, had something the matter with them. "While the health authorities have been gradually extending their work of looking after the health of school children, they have never gone so far as to make the general physical condi- tion of a child part of the work of the Health Department. Until recent years all that the medical inspectors in the schools did was to examine all cases reported by the teacher as being possi- bly infectious. This work in itself requires a lot of inspectors. Later, skin diseases and pediculosis, which was especially prevalent, were included. This ought to demonstrate pretty thoroughly that our children should not fear a mutation into a different life from the present. The mutation theory of evolution in biology seems un- doubtedly the true one, for by it all the lapses hitherto inex- plicable in the slow progress, "step-by-step" theory of Darwin are explained. Mutation does not overthrow Darwinism: it merely puts it on a firmer foundation, while it strengthens and simplifies the analogy between social and biological changes. When the mutation theory is at last accepted, therefore, it will remove one of the strongest objections made by certain evolutionists who have been insisting that such a tremendous change as that from capitalism to Socialism could be accom- plished only through the lapse of innumerable centuries. Eight now, while this nation is in the heyday of industrial prosperity, with prices never so high, crops never so good, 260 Socialism Inevitable labor never in such demand, the day when all will be changed seems to me almost at hand, the day when prices will be at the lowest ebb, yet without benefit to labor, which will then be unemployed and consequently without money. Let peace be made between Japan and Russia, let no new war break out, and no inventions revolutionize our methods of production, and the time when production will far exceed demand seems to me to be almost within the year. Let a huge unemployed army arise in the United States, let thou- sands upon thousands of our smaller capitalists and farmers become bankrupt; then the lessons that the Tarbells, the Steffens, the Eussells, the Sinclairs, the Moffets and the Law- sons are to-day teaching the public will bring their logical result. The mind of the nation is being prepared, in an almost miraculous way, to receive the theories of the Socialist when the next industrial crisis appears and at this very hour I can hear its approaching rumble. Let the capitalist look well upon his present sun of pros- perity, for when it next sinks it may sink forever, and Socialism rise to light the world for all. An Easy Way to Wealth: Wish Foe It 261 AN EASY WAY TO WEALTH, WISH FOR IT (December, 1903.) VERY few people, whether rich or poor, are satisfied in this world, although most of the poor think that if they were only rich they would have no trouble in finding the joy of life. Now, inasmuch as one per cent, of the population of the United States own more property than the whole of the remain- ing ninety-nine per cent., it is a hundred to one shot that the person who is reading this article belongs to the ninety-nine class, and to him I address myself. You are dissatisfied, or if you are not you ought to be, because you are not rich ; so I am going to show you why you are poor, and how you may get rich easily. This is not any program such as is usually presented, of saving your money and investing it in a deferred dividend policy in Papa McCurdy's New York Mutual Life Insurance Company. You probably are getting either wages or a salary of some sort. I say this because most of the people who are poor belong to the wage-earning class. You are, of course, a reader of the newspapers, and love to hear about the enormous ma- terial prosperity of this country. For instance, I quote the following from the morning Tribune of October 5th : AN ERA OF PROSPERITY. There are signs on every hand these days of overflowing na- tional prosperity. The United States is to harvest this year the biggest corn crop it has ever grown and the biggest wheat crop in its history, with one exception. Our exports and imports will break all records. Immigration is reaching a new high-water mark. Our iron and steel output will be the largest ever known, and we shall touch a new high level in coal production. It was announced the other day that postal receipts for 1904-'05 had exceeded those for 1903-'04 by $10,000,000. The Post Office De- partment's money-order business showed a gain for the year of 20 per cent. an unerring evidence of widely diffused prosperity. Now come Dun's and Bradstreet's reports on commercial failures 262 Socialism Inevitable in the United States for the first nine months of 1905 to testify to steadily improving trade conditions. There is no disputing these statements. The nation un- doubtedly is getting richer ; but the question is not about the nation, but about you, little you are you getting richer ? The statistics issued by the United States Commissioner of Labor show that, during the last year, wages have been practically at a standstill, although the cost of living has materially ad- vanced. Hence, if you are the average man of the wage- earning class, you are not so well off as you were a year ago, notwithstanding the increasing prosperity of the country. Now no one takes less wages than he can get, or pays more for his beefsteak and his potatoes than he must. The condition which forces you to take a low wage is that you know the job will be filled by some other man unless you accept what is offered, and the condition which makes you pay more for your food is that you must either do so or go hungry. Now, what I am trying to get at is that you have no choice in the matter. You have to accept conditions as they are; and what applies to you applies to all members of the working class. The reason wages are low is merely that there are plenty of men who are willing to accept low wages; and if one refuses to take what is offered, he quickly finds his place filled by another. It is competition against the unemployed that reduces wages, and unless you can remedy this, there is ob- viously no way of your becoming better off, no matter how prosperous the country may be. The problem, in other words, is to get rid of the unem- ployed ; and by that you do not mean men of the leisure class, such as Mr. Vanderbilt's son, who does not work because he has an independent income. He may be quite "unemployed," and yet you do not feel any competition from him : the un- employed man you fear is the one who has no income unless he is at work. There can be no doubt that if a man is hungry and wishes food, he will not stay long in such a condition if he can work and earn something to feed himself. A savage in the woods will catch a fish or shoot a deer, and thus satisfy his hunger. But the modern civilized man cannot do this : he must get food the way everyone else does, that is, by earning money; and the only way he has of getting money is to sell An Easy Way to Wealth: Wish For It 263 his labor to someone who will buy it, and with the wages which are paid him to purchase the food he requires. But it often happens that it is not so easy to find a man who wishes to hire him. Some political economists have en- deavored to prove that somewhere in the world there is always an employer ready to hire labor if one only knew where to find him. They make it appear that the reason there is difficulty in getting employment is solely on account of lack of knowl- edge of where labor is in demand. This, however, is quite a mistake. The employer can give employment only when he can sell what is produced; and as the working class are the principal consumers, since they constitute the greater part of the community, and as their powers of buying are restricted by the competitive wage system, it is not difficult to see that the employer himself has not an unlimited market for his goods, and, therefore, cannot furnish unlimited employment. Now the earth is so very productive when man's labor is applied to it with modern machinery that it is very easy to produce more to eat and to wear, that is, more of the plain necessities, than man needs or wants, and especially is it easy to produce more than he can buy, when we remember that his buying capacity is so limited by the Competitive Wage System. For it is clear that the employers are not in control of the situation, but can hire men only under certain con- ditions, viz., that they can sell what is produced. Therefore, it is seen that the Competitive System not only prevents you from getting a decent wage when you are employed, but it often makes it difficult for you to get any wages at all, owing to the fact that the employer cannot sell what is produced, and, therefore, cannot hire you to work. It is certainly evident that if you wish to abolish poverty, the first thing to do is to consider a method of abolishing the Competitive System; but as this at least provides a system of distribution although a very poor one you must be ready to substitute some other system to do the distributing. The Socialists propose that we substitute the Co-operative System, which means that, instead of paying men upon the basis of how little their labor can be bought for, they be paid upon the basis of what they actually produce. To-day, as I have already pointed out, the more a man produces, the more difficult it may be for him to get any wages at all, because 264: Socialism Inevitable the market becomes flooded with goods, perhaps the very goods that he himself has produced; and, therefore, he cannot sell his labor, owing to there being no demand for it. Under the Co-operative System, the more he produces, the more he gets, because goods will be produced for consumption and not for profit. To-day if you are working in a shoe factory and there is an overproduction of shoes, it does not mean that you get more shoes than you know what to do with. It simply means that you lose your job. It means that there are more shoes pro- duced than can be sold, and therefore, that you do not get any shoes at all, for, naturally, you do not get money to buy shoes when you are out of work. If we had Socialism and there was overproduction of goods, the hours of labor would be reduced to make consumption equal demand. One essential point, however, in connection with the Co- operative System which I have omitted to state, and which is necessary to the success of its operations, is the Public Owner- ship of the means of production. You have heard a great deal recently of Public Ownership, and no doubt it has puzzled many people to understand how it is to be of any benefit to the working man, and especially to the unemployed man. One reason of this lack of ability to understand the advantage of Public Ownership is that it usually is not clearly explained. We to-day have Public Ownership of the postoffice, and yet that does not mean that a man can get employment at good wages merely because he is out of a job and the postoffice belongs to the Government. But if we had the Co-operative System joined with Public Ownership, it would mean that any one wanting food or clothing, or any other form of wealth, would be at liberty to demand work from the nation, and would be sure not only of getting work, but also of re- ceiving the full value of his services. He would be sure of this because it would be simply utilizing for his own benefit the machinery of production, of which he himself, would be one of the joint owners. He might be compared to the savage who went out with his bow and arrow and shot the deer for his dinner. The bow and arrow were his "means of produc- tion," and the earth upon which the deer fed was also his own, in that it was free to all. However, although the savage had a complete ownership of his means of production, he An Easy Way to Wealth: Wish For It 265 could gain only a meagre living by the most strenuous work, because a bow and arrow are very poor tools of production compared with our modern machinery. To-day the workingman, by his knowledge of labor-saving machinery, can produce a hundred times as much as the savage with his bow and arrow; but the trouble is that co- incident with this largely increased production he has lost the ownership of the means of production. That is, he can- not use machinery without first getting the permission of a capitalist owner, which means being hired by the capitalists whenever they find that they can buy his labor and sell the product at a profit. But even though a railroad or a shoe factory were given to the individual workingman, absolutely free of cost, he would find it useless to him if he had to work it independently, inasmuch as the machinery of to-day re- quires collective management upon a large scale. Hence if the workingman wishes to be able to use the modern tools of production, it is evident not only that must he own them, but also that he must organize with other work- ingmen upon a larger scale in order to be able to use them. Capitalism, in short, has developed not only the tools but the organization of workingmen to operate the tools; but unfor- tunately it has not developed an equitable system for the dis- tribution of what is produced. The only way by which the product can be equitably distributed, as has heretofore been stated, is by the Co-operative System. To go back to the illustration of the savage. Suppose there were two savages, and that the bow was so large that it required both men to bend it, but that the ownership of the bow was vested in one of the men. It is obvious that the other man would not only have to get the permission of the owner of the bow before he could use it, but he would also have to get his help to bend it. Therefore, if he wished to be on the safe side regarding his supply of food, he would form a com- bination with the other savage so that they would own the bow in partnership, and would agree to work it jointly and co- operatively and so divide whatever game they might kill. Similarly, in order for the workingman to be sure of getting his food and clothing and the other goods that he wishes, he must own the machinery of production, and must organize to operate the machinery on the co-operative plan. Now the 266 Socialism Inevitable only feasible way for such machinery as railroads and other great modern tools of production to be owned publicly is through the medium of Government Ownership, which is by no means such a difficult proposition to work out practically as it might seem to one who takes up the idea for the first time. Public Ownership of the means of production, indeed, is already in practical operation in a limited way in this coun- try, as well as in foreign countries. We have the government ownership of the postoffice, and the municipal ownership of gas, water works, and a few other such utilities. In Europe many cities own and operate their own street cars and tele- phone lines; others conduct public bakeries, and, in fact, there is hardly any single operation which is not carried on in one way or another in some part of the world by a municipal or national government. It is certainly easy to show that there is no machinery which cannot be operated by the government: the difficulty is to convince the people of the advantage to be derived from Government Ownership in itself. For instance, the English Government owns the telegraph system, whereas in this coun- try it is in private hands, and yet it would be hard to show that for this reason poverty is any less prevalent there than here. The point that is continually being missed is that it is not merely Government Ownership in itself that is to solve the problem of poverty, it is the Co-operative System that is to do it, and Public Ownership is the necessary basis for the Co-operative System. In other words, Public Ownership is distinctly a means and not an end. I promised in the beginning of this article to show you how to get rich without any great exertion, and it seems to me that if you have followed my argument you will see that I have fulfilled my promise. Labor and capital in this country can obviously produce much more food and clothing and other necessities of life than the public can ever consume. I say obviously, because, a hundred years ago, before we had much of any machinery, everyone in the country had a fair living, and as with the use of present machinery labor is at least twenty times as effective as it was formerly, it may safely be said that it will require only one-twentieth the work per capita to produce the same quantity of goods. An Easy Way to Wealth: Wish For It 267 The wealth of the country is here at the disposal of the voters, and as the working class constitutes the vast majority of the voters, it is merely a question of them realizing how to vote in order to inaugurate the Socialist System. Let them support the only party which demands the Public Owner- ship of the means of production and the Co-operative System of distribution, viz., the Socialist Party. To sum up. As long as we have our Competitive System, we must necessarily have the unemployed man. To get rid of the unemployed man we must place the ownership of the tools of production of the country in his hands and let him produce for himself what he wishes. With modern machinery this can be done only through the collective action of the people, viz.: Public Ownership and the establishment of the Co- operative Commonwealth. It seems to me that I have given a very straight statement of how we may abolish poverty, and at the same time acquire wealth with practically no exertion. We simply have to wish for the earth in order to get it, and there is but one way to wish effectively for it ; that is to vote for the Socialist Party. Let the nation own the resources of the earth, the land, the machinery, the water power, the coal mines ; let us make these natural powers work for us and produce the wealth that we all wish, and let us distribute that wealth co-operatively to ourselves. 268 Socialism Inevitable MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP ITS MEANING (January, 1906.) MUNICIPAL OWNERSHIP is admittedly the political question of the hour, but what our politicians are now bothering their heads about is whether it is destined to be the question of the future, or like the silver issue, to burn fiercely for a while and then die without leaving a flicker to remind us of its existence. For years prior to 1896 the politicians of both parties were flirting with free silver. The merits of the question, of course, did not concern them: it was simply that free silver was becoming popular, and as it seemed so remotely connected with any possibility of realization, those against silver did not take the matter seriously enough to deny their votes to its advocates. Advocating free silver was all to the good for the politician until, at last, the nomination of Bryan upon the silver plat- form adopted by the Democratic Party suddenly made it a living issue. The politicians were then forced to reverse their positions, for a man could no longer fervidly declare himself for free silver and take the chance that the sincerity of his sentiments would never be put to the test. It became evident, in fact, that unless the most strenuous work were done the Democrats would win and the country go upon a silver basis. However, the strenuous work was done, as we all know, most of the politicians eating their words wherein they had de- clared fealty to silver, and becoming earnest advocates of "honest money." It may be remembered, indeed, that Presi- dent McKinley himself, not so many years before, had cast his vote in Congress for free silver. But the campaign was carried on, not upon what men had advocated before 1896, but upon what they advocated that memorable year. Now, municipal ownership, as a political policy, has a number of features not altogether different from free silver. Until recently it has been an issue so remote that the politi- Municipal Ownership Its Meaning 269 cians felt no fear in advocating it, but like the free silver question, which was once looked upon as merely the dreaming of faddists, it has all at once become the active political issue of the day. Unlike free silver, however, it has such a strong economic basis, that the hostility of the larger capitalists cannot defeat it by a mere array of statistics and appeals to sound common sense such as were found so effective in the Bryan campaign in 1896. Now that the silver fever is dead and passed away, most of its advocates will usually admit that it was really an economic heresy, and that the country was fortunate in having a Mark Hanna at hand with his generalship and his immense contributions from the trusts to demonstrate the errors of sixteen to one and the necessity of defeating Bryan. It is noteworthy, moreover, that most of the old free silver shouters are now in line for municipal ownership and the explanation of the connection between the two is found in the fact that there is a tendency for a political party to form in this country as representatives of the moderately well-to-do- people as against the very rich. The free coinage of silver was an attempt of the poorer classes to raise themselves towards economic equality with the rich, and the only reason it has been abandoned is that it was recognized to be a futile method, an attempt to raise oneself by one's bootstraps. It was not an impossible task to show the American voter that as long as Mr. Bockef eller owned the oil refineries, and Mr. Vanderbilt the railways, and Mr. Belmont the street cars, and as long as the American voter himself owned practically nothing, no matter whether his wages were paid in silver or in gold, he was sure to be rapidly separated from his money whenever he bought oil or rode on a railway or a street car. Before 1896 there were many men who had a kind of hazy idea that some sort of juggling with the medium of exchange would institute a millennium, wherein v the common people would have all the comforts of life and some of the luxuries, while at the same time the rich would have even more than to- day. The Republican Party and Mr. Hanna forever dissipated all such crude ideas. Most of the people now see that there is but one earth, and that if Rockefeller owns it, the other fellow cannot own it, any more than one can eat his cake and have 270 Socialism Inevitable it too. However, while there is a pretty fair knowledge of this very elementary proposition, the possibility of getting the earth away from Mr. Kockefeller by commercial means appears so remote, and to take it from him by any political method seems so dangerous that the people are almost in despair. Rockefeller certainly does not spend the half, or even a tenth of his in- come ; in fact he cannot spend twenty million a year, so that as long as he is "saving" up so many millions, there is no hope of us getting or his losing his wealth. The old theory of the decentralization of wealth by waste and extravagance does not apply to such fortunes as Rockefeller's. As for his losing it by foolish investments, that, too, is impossible. First, because with his income of twenty millions a year he can afford to lose what might be regarded as vast fortunes and still have millions left to add to his capital. Secondly, because the investment of his surplus is in the hands of his own staff of experts, who go about the matter so mathematically and scientifically running no chances and taking nothing for granted that where a poorer man will find it cheaper to forego investigation and chance a loss, with Rockefeller, such is the magnitude of his interests, that he can always afford a careful investigation of every proposed investment. And what is true of Rockefeller applies in only a slightly minor degree to many others of our larger capital- ists. Then, again, many of the smaller capitalists invest their savings co-operatively, so to speak, in a trust company, which, making large investments, can afford to apply the Rockefeller methods, thus giving them something of the safety enjoyed by Mr. Rockefeller. Hence it is evident that by no commercial methods now prevailing will the people ever see Rockefeller & Co. lose their grip on the wealth of the country. Now when a political method to effect a fairer distribution of wealth is suggested without any specific details, the ordinary citizen has a horrid vision of the country falling into the hands of a mob, and a holiday set when all the property of the rich will be divided up among the poor. He not only knows that any such division would be futile, inasmuch as it would not be many years before Rockefeller or somebody worse would have acquired all the money again, but he also objects to throwing his own wealth into the pile with no certainty of Municipal Ownership Its Meaning 271 getting back in the grand division as much as he now possesses. Thus, while there is certainly a general desire for a better distribution of wealth, the means of obtaining it seem so impossible that the desire has not as yet come into the realm of practical politics. Free silver, as said before, had its run of popularity because of this underlying feeling of the people that something should be done to establish more of an economic equality. Now, while it can be easily shown that municipal ownership is unquestionably a very important step toward an equaliza- tion of economic opportunity, it is doubtful if its popularity as a movement can be rightly ascribed to any definite knowl- edge on the part of its advocates. In fact, a great many of them such as Judge Dunne, of Chicago, and Mayor Johnson, of Cleveland, would no doubt attempt to deny it, or, admitting it, would minimize it. But that such is really the truth re- garding municipal ownership can be seen by a moment's reflection. When we speak of a great capitalist like Kockef eller owning the earth, what do we really mean? We mean he owns some land, some railways, some oil refineries, some street-car lines, etc., or, rather, we mean that he has large amounts of stock in certain corporations which own such properties. Now if the city of Chicago buys the street-car lines from Mr. Eocke- feller, it certainly is self-evident that each and every citizen of Chicago has acquired by that operation a share with his fellow citizens in the ownership and management of a prop- erty where formerly he had neither ownership nor direction. There will have unquestionably been a transfer of wealth and power from Eockefeller to himself, and, although the citizen may hardly realize the import of the transaction, there is little doubt but that Mr. Eockefeller understands it, and very thoroughly, too. There has been no confiscation of the street- car line, for Mr. Eockefeller will have been paid full value in money or bonds for his property. It might be noted, on the other hand, that the changing of the coinage from gold to silver would have accomplished no such transfer of property, and as it is this latent desire of the people to socialize the ownership of property, that in my estimation, is forming the basic impulse of the movement for public ownership, I therefore see for it a great success where 272 Socialism Inevitable the free silver movement met with dismal failure. However* while this vague desire of the people for economic equality is the power behind the municipal ownership movement, still I would be the last to deny that there are certain superficial conditions connected with the private ownership of public utilities which have given the movement its present impor- tance. In the first place, the bad service rendered by private cor- porations has greatly stimulated the desire for a change. When Yerkes said, "The dividends are in the straps," he gave us the whole theory of private ownership of street-car lines. The private corporation was not formed to serve the public, but to make dividends for its stockholders. If one car can be used to carry a double load by the simple expedient of making half of the occupants stand up and hang on to straps, then why should money be wasted in buying more cars and paying wages to two conductors and two motormen instead of to one ? If people must have water, pure or impure, then why waste money upon a filtration plant, which may save lives from typhoid, but will never increase the profits of companies own- ing the water works ? Every organism must obey the fundamental law of its existence. The fundamental law of a private corporation is to develop profits, while the fundamental law of a public corj- poration is to develop life. When the water works are privately owned, profits come first, and when the works are publicly owned, pure water and good health come first. And this law of private corporations holds good even when the stockholders are of the highest respectability. For instance, take the following case of private ownership of water in Ithaca, N. Y., given by Samuel Hopkins Adams, in a recent number of McClure's Magazine: For two years, in Ithaca, in 1903, the water had been so obvious- ly unfit to drink that the water company, a private enterprise, was constantly in receipt of complaints from the local board of health and from private citizens. Its contract called for water free from disease-producing organisms; the State has acquired reasonable guardianship of its water-shed. Contract and law seem to have been matters of equal indifference to the corpor- ation. As subsequent testimony showed after the tragedy was over the water-shed which supplied the city was lined with pig-styes, manure piles, garbage heaps, cattle pens and outhouses, Municipal Ownership Its Meaning 273 many of them discharging their contents, with only a few yards' flow, direct into Six-Mile Creek, or the streams that supplied it. Whosoever reads the evidence adduced at the investigation needs to have a strong stomach. For some years intestinal dis- eases and "enteric fever," also called "Ithaca fever" an- other phase of the polite fiction that we have found in Cleveland had been common. In the winter of 1902-1903 the water com- pany was aroused to action and began work upon a dam prepa- ratory to installing a filtration plant. It was just a trifle too late. Whether from a little group of shanties back of Six-Mile Creek, which had been throwing slops from the sick-rooms of several typhoid patients into the stream emptying close to the intake, or from the Italians employed on the dam who established their sinks within a few yards of the bank an illuminating in- stance of the kind of protection afforded by the water company the fever appeared in epidemic form in the middle of January, 1903. By the time the disease had run its course, there were 1,380 known cases out of a population of 15,800; more than one to every dozen inhabitants. Happily, the fever was not one of the most virulent type; only about eight per cent, of the reported cases died. But even with that low rate, the mortality reached the appalling ratio of nearly 725 per 100,000. Early in the trouble Cornell University assumed a prominent part in the management of affairs. Fortunately, the water of the campus, supplied by a separate system, was not contaminated, though it was far from clear; so that among those students who used the campus water exclusively there were no cases. Only a small part of the student body, however, lives on the college grounds. The rest are scattered around them. The disease early appeared among them. Therefore, it was only natural that President Schurman and the trustees of the university should have taken an active interest. Unhappily this took the form of minimizing the peril, a policy which may well have cost a num- ber of lives. It is but fair to the university authorities to say that at this time they utterly failed to appreciate the gravity of the situation. While the health authorities were warning the public in terms which seemed to the university "sensational," there emanated from Cornell reassuring statements. The atti- tude of the institution was, frankly, that there was no great danger. It strove to allay the rising panic, "in the interests of the college," just as Cleveland, St. Louis and other cities have kept down their typhoid rates "for the good of the city," but with this difference, that the institution must be credited with insistence upon the utmost precautions. In the latter part of February the State Board of Health looked into the situation at Ithaca, and its official head was closeted for some time with President Schurman. Immediately after this conference the following statement was given out in pamphlet form from the president's office: "Dr. Daniel Lewis, the State Commissioner of Health, who is here to-day, after having studied the siutation carefully from 274: Socialism Inevitable every side, makes the statement that the plans which are already in operation, and which are this day being extended by the city authorities, make it perfectly safe for anyone to return to Ithaca who so desires." At this time there were 400 to 500 fever cases in the city; new cases were appearing in large numbers every day, and every weary and over-worked physician in the place knew that never had the disease been less under control. Some misconception seems to have entered into the conference between Dr. Schurman and Dr. Lewis, for, as soon as the optimistic pamphlet appeared, the local board of health wired the State Commissioner, asking if he were willing to go on record as saying that students might safely return to town. Response came promptly; he was not. Until certain measures should have been taken he would not regard it as safe. Thereupon the pamphlet was withdrawn from circulation and another substituted. The Cornell Infirmary, to which many of the students were taken, was under lay management. There seems to have been little regard for professional opinion. One member of the medical faculty of Cornell resigned from the managing committee because the "opinions of a physician were not worthy of the consideration of the laymen of the committee." Another was rebuked in writing because he took a member of the New York Cornell medical faculty to the hospital, which seems, curiously enough, to be against the rules. At a time when all the obtainable aid was necessary, the medical faculty was, as far as possible, ex- cluded from any direction of the infirmary. The result: Percentage of deaths to cases among students treated at the Cornell Infirmary, 11.5; percentage of deaths to cases among students treated at the City Hospital, 6.7. Conditions of overcrowding and the class of patients considered were the same. That nearly seventy-five per cent, more cases were lost in the Cornell institution than in the City Hospital may fairly be regarded as the measure of difference between efficient and inefficient management. Finally, the death rate of the infirmary was one and one-half per cent, higher than that of outside non-hospital treatment. That is, putting it barely, it was somewhat better not to go to a hospital at all than to trust to the management of the well-meaning trustees of the university institution. For six weeks the epidemic raged; then subsided, though its effects were felt far into the summer. The stricken town had time to consider. Investigation followed. As I have said, the testimony does not make pleasant reading. It proved, with iterated and heaped-up evidence, that the water company was either culpably ignorant or culpably negligent of the water-shed which had been intrusted to its care. On my visit to Ithaca I asked several representative citizens what was done with the responsible managers of the company. They seemed surprised. "Nothing," they said. "Was no attempt made to call them to account ?" Municipal Ownership Its Meaning 275 "Certainly not." "Weren't they even indicted?" "Indicted? Why, the very best people in town were in that water company.* Our leading financiers, merchants, church members, etc." (The list is a familiar one; it's the same kind of list that one finds owning the disease-breeding tenements in Chicago, New York, and Philadelphia.) Punishment did follow the crime, however. But not the crime of poisoning the water, the crime of honestly attempting to let people know the truth of their peril. A member of the faculty of Cornell University printed in the local paper which he owned the facts of the typhoid epidemic. Warned that he was jeopardizing his university interest by this course, that the policy of the university "deprecated sensational reports tending to incite alarm," he replied that the policy of his paper was to tell the truth as it appeared. After the scourge had passed, this man found himself persona non grata with the controlling interests of the institution. Owing to the unusual success of his department, he was in line for a full professorship. Now he learned that as long as he remained at the head of the depart- ment it would continue to be merely an assistant professor's de- partment. He resigned. One of the Ithaca physicians has for years been connected with Cornell University on the medical side. When Cornell began its policy of optimism at the height of the epidemic, this physician took the other side. Optimism seemed to him out of place under the circumstances. He supported the policy of the local health board. Despite warnings, he continued to hold to his course. Toward the end of the year his friends learned that he need not expect a reappointment to the university staff. To save himself humiliation he resigned. Other cases might be cited where the outspoken were penalized socially, commercially and even po- litically. Ithaca has learned its lesson now; witness the vote of 1,335 for municipal ownership. Cornell has its own filtration plant, which bears Carnegie's name, in agreeable variation to the long line of libraries. I quote the case of Ithaca at length because it must at once be admitted that if a place with as high a standard of intel- ligence as this university city finds it impossible to get pure water under private ownership, how much more impossible must it be for our large cities with a much lower standard of intelligence ? * The secretary and treasurer of Cornell University was at that time a director of the water company; several of the university trustees had been directors up to within a short time, and their families were still financially interested in the company. 276 Socialism Inevitable This case also illustrates the demoralization of university life itself as the result of the private ownership of Cornell Univer- sity. It is true that Cornell is not operated for the sake of profit, but it is true, on the other hand, that such was the fear of the diminution of prestige and income owing to the students leaving if they should gain knowledge of a bad water supply, that President Schurman was willing to sup- press the information and fatally risk the lives of his students. So that the public is not only dissatisfied with private owner- ship of public utilities because of the bad service rendered, but it has another and deeper grievance namely, the corruption of public officials by the private corporations. It is notorious that practically all our larger American cities are each in the control of a boss who derives his political power from the private corporations which own the public utilities. This boss often has control of the machinery of not only one, but both of the great political parties. The mayor and the aldermen are his creatures. Dependent upon him for their places, the least infraction of his wish means the loss of their political heads. The boss deals directly with the gas company when it wishes to lay more mains or to do anything requiring political action or consent, such as the acquiring of a new franchise. The same is true of the electric light company, the street car company, the telephone com- pany, and the various other companies owning public utilities. The boss directly or indirectly gets money from the corpora- tions and has the power not only of appointment to political offices of the city, but also to many positions with the corpora- tions. Boss Cox, for instance, can get his man a place upon the police force of Cincinnati, or as a street-car conductor or a lineman with the telephone company, with equal facility. The control of a man's job means very nearly the control of his life, and hence it is not surprising that the giving of so small a commodity as one's vote to the boss in exchange for work is a very ordinary and usual transaction with many thousands of our fellow citizens. The private corporations, moreover, are under compulsion to play politics as much in order to prevent themselves being blackmailed as they are to gain illegal rights. Buying the good graces of the boss is never, of course, entered upon the books of a company in such a manner that the uninitiated Municipal Ownership Its Meaning 277 would know what the money went for. Legal expense is a broad, elastic term that can cover all such underground dis- bursements. Now while the facts of corruption by our private corpora- tions are not denied, the opponents of municipal ownership reply that if the public officials of to-day are so easily cor- rupted, what hope is there in putting still more power into their hands ? They forget that the source of corruption is in the private ownership of public utilities and that the more these utilities are municipalized, the more will the corrupt- ing stream be narrowed. When one impure rivulet poisons a great river, and gives a city an epidemic of typhoid fever, it is no argument against purifying the other contributory rivulets, but is a concrete argument for the purifying of the rivulet that is doing the mischief; so that when we find, notwith- standing the municipal ownership of certain utilities, cor- ruption still continues, our remedy is not to stop our work, but to still further pursue our purifying process. For instance, C. E. Eussell, in Everybody's Magazine, de- clares that the Beef Trust in Chicago to-day takes millions of gallons from the city water mains without making any payment. It has bribed the city officials to wink at the stealing. This certainly shows a state of corruption in Chicago's waterworks, notwithstanding municipal ownership. But who does the corrupting ? Is it not owing to the private ownership of the other public utilities, such as the gas works, the street cars, the telephones, and particularly the stock yards ? In many European cities every one of these public utilities is municipally owned, so to advocate the same by our American cities is proposing no untried experiment. Eegard- ing the saving to the individual under public ownership, I need only say that wherever there is municipal ownership, the price of gas, of water, of telephones, of street-car trans- portation, etc., is lower than under private ownership, and that the service is nearly always better. But I must return to my original reason for prophesying that municipal owner- ship is sure to be the next great and successful political movement in the United States; namely, because it tends to effect a wider and more equitable distribution of the wealth of the country. 278 Socialism Inevitable Man is a land animal, and land is his first requisite for ex- istence. Next, however, he must have the tools wherewith to work the land. In colonial days, man's tools were primitive. He had a pine knot for his gasworks, he had a gourd for his water works, he had his donkey for his street-car, he had his own knife and his own back yard for his stock yards. These tools were his own, and he could use them without asking any man's or any trust's permission. Land was his for the walking to the westward a few miles. The American then was indeed a free man, who owed no man obeisance. But to-day, if he would use land, he must first ask permission of an Astor; if he would have light and heat, he must ask permission of a ^Rockefeller; if he would go from place to place, he must bend the knee to a Vanderbilt, and so on, indefinitely. Man has always resented serfdom, his eternal struggle has been for liberty; and so to-day the struggle is for economic liberty, for liberty to use the earth, to use the tools necessary to produce wealth, without asking the leave of an owner. Municipal ownership to the extent that it gives men the ownership of certain tools to wit, water works, gas works, street cars, telephones, etc. frees man from bending the knee to private owners, and to that extent is an onward step toward the emancipation of man from thraldom to man. It is because municipal ownership is such a forward step that it is bound to be made, for the course of man has ever been onward. But, after all, one must always remember that it is but a step to the goal of complete economic freedom and of the abolition of poverty. Municipal ownership is not itself a goal. Money Undek Socialism 279 MONEY UNDER SOCIALISM (February, 1906.) MONEY should be merely a tool to facilitate exchange. Supposing I am a conductor on a passenger train, the time I give to the community on this work should be recompensed by the community giving me the time of another man, or the part time of a number of men, equal to what I have myself expended. I have created no product that is of value to me, but I have performed work of value to society, so that if I work ten hours on the railroad train, I should, in equity, be able to command the product of ten hours of labor from other men. Now suppose I have performed my ten hours' work and want some sugar, some cloth, and some potatoes. The railway com- pany gives me a five dollar gold piece for my time, and with this money I buy the sugar, cloth and potatoes wanted. The gold in the five dollars required a certain amount of labor in its production, and the general, but quite erroneous assump- tion is that the labor time involved in getting the gold out of the ground and refining it, is about equivalent to the labor time involved in producing the sugar, cloth and potatoes which I get for the gold piece, or the time I worked on the train, viz., ten hours. In other words, it is assumed that the gold piece merely enables me to get a fair equivalent in goods that I want, calculating the value by the labor of others, in exchange for the time I spend as conductor upon the passenger train. If this exchange of labor for labor were really made, then there would be no complaint about the equity of our present competitive system; but as a matter of fact, the exchange is not made in that manner at all. It is assumed that if, instead of my working ten hours on the railway, I should spend ten hours in a gold mine, the time so spent would produce on an average about five dollars worth of gold, which I would get. But I would soon find that all the good gold mines are 280 Socialism Inevitable owned by private individuals, and that I would not be free to dig where I wanted. Besides, even if there were good ground open, it would require a great outlay of capital in the con- struction or installation of tunnels, hoisting machines, smelt- ers, railways to carry the ore, etc., etc., before I would be able to use the ground. So to work on rich ground with proper tools I would be obliged to hire myself out to a mining com- pany. Of course there are thousands in the mining districts of the West who work on their own hook, with no more expenditure of capital. than that required for a pick and pan; they occupy the poorer ground, or the tailings, and earn, on an average, about what they would get if they hired out. If they worked for one of the big companies they might produce from three to fifty times as much, but the increased production would do them little good since it would go to the owners. Wages, in short, are just about the same whether the mine pays big profits or no profits at all. So we find that the independent miner, with no machinery and poor land, gets about as much as if he were working for a mining company, though it by no means follows that his wages are fixed by the average production per capita of the whole mining camp. This, indeed, may be as much as fifty dollars a day, while the average wage may be five dollars or even less. Needless to say, the owner of the mines absorbs the difference. But the miner not only receives unfair treatment in the matter of remuneration for his labor but is robbed when he exchanges his gold for merchandise. With his &Ye dollars in gold he buys so much cloth, sugar and potatoes, but upon every one of those articles he pays a monopoly profit, owing to the railway charges for freight. He must therefore re- imburse the producers for all the tribute that they have paid to the railways for the carriage of the goods, which includes excessive charges upon the wool it has carried from the farmer to the manufacturer, upon the cloth carried from the manu- facturer to the retail dealer, and lastly upon the goods shipped to the miner. All this the miner must pay back to the various producers or he cannot get his cloth. Furthermore, if any machinery manufactured by a trust has been used in the production of the articles he buys, of Money Under Socialism 281 course an extra charge has to be made for it, which, eventually, the miner must stand for. Thus he must reimburse the farmer for the excessive price he, the latter, has paid the Agricultural Machine Trust for his implements, as well as for the excessive freight rates upon them that the railways have charged to even up for the high prices they have paid the Steel Trust for their rails. All this, of course, must be added to the price of the potatoes plus another exorbitant freight charge when these are received by the miner. But the Sugar Trust, not to be behind in the game, also puts up its price far beyond the labor cost of production, and when the miner gives up his gold for sugar, he must pay an extra price that the Trust may pay its dividends on watered stock. Hence we say that the miner is not only robbed in the beginning by being forced to take only five dollars' worth of gold when he may have produced fifty dollars worth, but again when he spends his five dollars, inasmuch as he has to pay tribute to almost every trust in the country. Of course, he must also pay tribute to the various land- lords. Not only does he pay the landlord for the ground upon which the potatoes are raised, but he pays the rent of the commission agent's store in the great city, and he pays the rent of the commission agent's house ; he also pays a monopoly price for not only his own gas, but for the gas used by all the people who are engaged in selling and producing his cloth. Nevertheless, the amount of gold the miner gets as wages determines what the conductor gets as his wages, and if the latter were not satisfied with his payment and felt he could get fairer treatment by going to the mines, he would imme- diately do so ; but knowing that the miner is as badly robbed as he is, he stays on his railway train. So that under our present system the daily wage, while nominally giving to the wage-earner the equivalent of what he produces, in reality does nothing of the sort. Socialists say that the man who works should receive the just equivalent of his labor either in goods of his own production or of other people's production, at his option. 282 Socialism Inevitable NEW SHOES FOR OLD BALLOTS (March, 1906.) DTJKING the decadence of the Eoman Empire it was customary to suppress the clamor of the proletariat by giving them free bread and free circuses panem et cir censes. Practically the same thing goes on to-day in New York City. There are a few dozen men, mostly Tammany "leaders," who have a following of from a few hundred to several thou- sand, whom they entertain during the summer months by taking them up the Hudson river for excursions, providing free lunch and free beer. During the winter free clothing is distributed. In return for this these thousands of men deliver up their votes to the givers of the excursions and food. Then the "leader" sells the votes to Belmont & Co. for so much hard cash. As an illustration of this, I take the following from the New York Sun, February 7, 1906 : When Congressman Big Tim Sullivan gave a Christmas dinner the 5,000 participants received each a ticket calling for a pair of shoes. At the dinner Big Tim said to his constituents: "Boys, I think we're going to have another long stretch of mild weather, and you won't need the shoes as much now as when it gets good and cold in February." He announced that the shoes would be given out on February 6th. That Tim is a good weather prophet was the unanimous opinion of the Bowery yesterday afternoon when 4,800 men, each supplied with one of his cards, showed up at the club house at 207 Bowery. Each man except two one-legged men, who took one each, got a good pair of shoes in which there was a pair of woolen socks. As they left the club house the men were passed through the assembly room on the second floor, where hot coffee and sandwiches awaited them. Big Tim was present with all the other Sullivans. It is not for Wilshire's to find fault with these poor men who exchange their votes for something so very tangible as a pair of shoes, while the world excuses the hundreds of New Shoes For Old Ballots 283 thousands who give away their votes without getting anything at all for them. Shoes and free sandwiches are certainly better than nothing. We Americans might just as well own our country and have a guaranteed yearly income of $10,000 apiece, instead of a chance at a sandwich, if enough of us would only mark our ballots right, that is, if the majority of us voted for the Social- ist Party. We would then have Socialism, and poverty would be abolished. Meanwhile we don't do it, and the greater part of us throw away our ballots without even getting the pair of shoes which Big Tim Sullivan gives his constituents. 284 Socialism Inevitable WILSHIRE'S AND THE CRISIS (March, 1906.) WILSHIRE'S MAGAZINE is not dwelling upon the approaching unemployed problem because it thinks that nothing but the appearance of that event will bring on Socialism, but because it believes an unemployed problem to be absolutely inevitable. We do not look for such people as ordinarily compose the unemployed army which is always with us to be revolutionists. We know that those who have made a failure of life under our present competitive system are not likely to be the ones who are to carry on most of the work of Socialism. But we do say that when the economic crisis comes, and hundreds of thousands of men are hungry for the first time, men who have heretofore considered themselves successes in life that these will be the very finest recruits possible for our Socialist army of the future. Now I do not expect to see misery and poverty progress- ively increasing and so finally forcing the nation to revolt. As a matter of fact, I might even be willing to admit the claim made by some that labor is possibly better off to-day than it was formerly, and that its condition may be improving from year to year. It is not progressive misery that will stimulate men to a recognition of Socialism, but the sudden transition from prosperity to hard times. In the meantime, in order that the work may be done properly when the crisis comes, we Socialists are educating the working class so that they may realize how to act. We don't think the mass of men will act unless they feel impelled to, and, on the other hand, we don't think that they will then move in the right direction unless they have been instructed. The mission of the Socialists is to show the workingman how the competitive system robs him and how he can liberate himself by being the owner of the machinery of production himself. Wilshire's and the Crisis 285 We are, of course, ready to admit that Socialism can come without an economic crisis ; but we believe that with the aid of such a crisis it will be much easier to convince the working class of the desirability of the change. In the meantime, however, we Socialists should act as if no crisis were impend- ing. Keep pegging along, and never stop, 286 Socialism Inevitable STRIKE TO SET THEM FREE (April, 1906.) THE secret night arrest and deportation from Colorado to Idaho of Haywood, Moyer and Pettibone, of the Western Federation of Miners, is not only an event of the greatest interest to the labor movement of the United States, but it is an act menacing the whole fabric of our present industrial and social structure. Society to-day is held together by the feeling of the large majority of the people that if substantial equity is not done to every man by our present laws and customs, it is about as near as can be expected, taking one thing with another. We Socialists know, and are trying to make the people see, that the present economic inequality and injustice is the direct consequence of our competitive system, and that the only way to avoid inequity is to establish Socialism, but it is a tedious, slow process to teach the people the economics of Socialism. When it comes to a question of the people deciding the life or death of a man, however, they do not hesitate a single moment. If they think that a man has committed a crime against either an individual or the commonwealth, there is practically a consensus for his execution. If, upon the other hand, they think he is not guilty, they have no hesitancy in expressing their feelings against his punishment. The com- mon instinct of humanity is aroused at the thought of killing an innocent man, no matter who he may be, and when the man threatened is one who is known to have devoted his life to the good of his fellows and has not only committed no crime, but is picked out for slaughter merely because he has devoted himself to their interests, then may we expect a great wave of indignant protest to sweep the nation. Never before the arrest of Haywood, Moyer and Pettibone has such a condition as this ever been presented to the Ameri- can nation. The nearest approach to it was probably when Strike to Set Them Free 287 the Southern Confederacy threatened to execute a number of captured Union officers upon the false charge that they were spies. This so aroused the whole North that Lincoln, in response, advised the Confederacy that he would execute certain Confederate officers, then held in captivity, if the South should carry out its threat, whereupon the latter changed its mind, and the incident was over. The execution of the Anarchists in Chicago, in 1886, was similar in certain respects to the threatened execution of Moyer and Haywood, with the exception that it did not excite any great national protest first, because the labor movement was not developed to the extent that it is to-day ; and, secondly, because the men accused had associated themselves, in the public mind, with the advocacy of bomb throwing, and the public felt that their execution was only a matter of just retribution. On the whole, however, the present Haywood-Moyer-Petti- bone case is upon quite a different footing. The labor move- ment of America is to-day infinitely better organized than it was twenty years ago ; and not only is this so, but the people generally have had so many striking indictments of the present capitalistic system by such writers as Lawson, Sinclair, Stef- fens, Phillips, and others, have seen so many of their idols fall, like Senator Depew, and have been so enlightened by ftie insurance investigations as to how graft permeates our whole political and industrial structure, that they no longer feel their former resentment against those who criticize the present state of society. Instead of looking upon America as the perfection of all things, as we did in 1886, and looking upon the man who found fault as one quite worthy of hanging, we now place our critics on the pinnacle of public esteem. Nor do we have the same respect for the courts that we did. We can no longer doubt that they are corrupt and venial and that the money interest of the country controls them. Twenty years ago the courts were an honored institution. The growth of Socialism, furthermore, has made such progress that thousands of people are to-day ready for a Social Kevolution, and eager to listen to the words of a Eevolutionist, where twenty years ago they would have mobbed him. 288 Socialism Inevitable The public protest to-day against the treatment of Haywood and Moyer is infinitely greater and more powerful than any similar protest in the past. The labor unions from one end of the country to the other are making the case of Haywood and Moyer their own. At this writing $200,000 have been subscribed for the defence fund, and $1,000,000 more can be had, if necessary. As Gov. Gooding, of Idaho, and his servile judges push the trial of the accused men, there is no telling how high public indignation may run. No one can say that this event may not be the spark which will inflame the American people to the inevitable Social Revolution. The greatest crime against a free people in modern history is threatened in the trial of Haywood, Moyer and Pettibone. No one who knows anything about the character of the men and the circumstances of the crime, can believe that they were connected with the assassination of Gov. Steunenberg. The trial is merely an attempt on the part of the mine owners of Idaho and Colorado to intimidate the labor unions. They think that the hanging of the leaders will mean such a com- plete cowing of labor that capital will forever have it at its mercy. If the working class of America do not make their protest sufficiently vigorous to prevent the possibility of this judicial crime, then the execution of these prominent labor ieaders may be but the beginning of a series of "legal" murders from one end of the country to the other. The time for us to make our protest is now, and not after the men are in their coffins. Let indignation meetings be held from Maine to California. Let money be collected. Let parades be made in our great cities, parades in such numbers that their immense size will intimidate the capitalist class from carrying out their infamous program. If the trial proceeds and such a terrible event as conviction by the servile minions of plutocracy should follow, and if a single one of our Comrades, Haywood, Moyer or Pettibone, is condemned, it should be the signal to the working class of America to rise let that mark the date for the beginning of a Great National Strike. Then let every workingman who has a heart in his breast register a mighty oath that not a wheel shall turn in this country, from ocean to ocean, until the verdict is set aside, and every one of the accused set free. Strike to Set Them Free 289 Let our factories be closed; let our mills stop grinding flour, and our bakeries stop baking bread. Let there be a complete paralysis of railway transportation and telegraphic informa- tion. Let our coal mines close, and let us die of hunger and cold, if necessary, to make our protest heeded. The working class of this country have it in their power to say to the plutocracy, "You shall starve to death if a hair on the head of either Haywood, Moyer or Pettibone is injured. Let them show the world that they are not so lost to shame, so devoid of the red blood of courage, that they will allow one of their comrades to suffer death at the hands of their enemies, when they have at their command a weapon which will set them free. Hurrah for the General Strike! 290 Socialism Inevitable ROOSEVELTS MUCK RAKE (April, 1906) 1AM in agreement with the President on the muck-rake question on one point at least, namely, that the problem now is rather how to get rid of the muck than to merely stir it up and leave it a stench to the nostrils. Everyone knows by this time that the muck is here. President Koosevelt suggests the cause of the muck and likewise the remedy, and here I am again in agreement with him. He says: "Materially we must strive to secure a broader economic opportunity for all men, so that each shall have a better chance to show the stuff of which he is made." That's good Socialistic doctrine and pretty nearly what I say myself. "Let all men have an equal economic oppor- tunity," is the way I would have put it. "Muck" exists because some men have a much better oppor- tunity than others and can buy or bully their fellows into economic submission. For instance, Vanderbilt owns a rail- way which gives him a superior economic opportunity. With this he extorts "muck" from the public, and with the "muck" he buys our legislators, who make his man, Depew, a Senator. The "muck-rake" man then comes along, tells the public all about the transaction, stirs up the muck, and leaves us with our handkerchiefs to our noses to find out how much better we are off than we were before. Nevertheless, he makes us sure that the muck is there. Now the President is not this kind of a muck-raker. When he rakes muck he knows where he is going to dump it. Not only is he going to show us how to get rid of the muck, but he also purposes to show us how to prevent future accumulations. President Eoosevelt clearly sees the source of muck to be in the existence of large fortunes ; in the ownership of our railways by a Vanderbilt, our oil refineries by a Kockefeller, our sugar refineries by a Have- Roosevelt's Muck Bake 291 meyer, etc. He tells us that we must take these properties away from them, not now, but soon, when they die. I quote again : "We must have a tax to put it out of the power of the owners of these immense fortunes to pass on more than a certain amount to any one individual." Now it seems to me that if I found a muck heap under my window I would not wait until somebody died before try- ing to remove it. I would rake off the muck at once. Why endure the stench a moment longer than necessary? If Roosevelt sees that private ownership an overgrown fortune of wealth causes the muck, then he has no more right to ask us to wait for the owner to die than he would have to ask a city to continue drinking water known to be polluted with typhoid germs coming from the drainage of certain houses because the owners of the houses were not yet dead. It may be true that the greater the fortune the more the muck; yet it is also true that even a very little muck is dis- agreeable just as the slightest attack of typhoid fever would be. No one would advise letting even one house drain into and pollute a city's water supply. No one would allow the smallest amount of muck in his house if he could throw it out. If small fortunes give an economic opportunity to the class that own them to create even a little muck, while we are cleaning house, why not do it thoroughly? Let us do away with all fortunes and all muck, and do away with them at once. Let the Nation Own the Fortunes, both big and little, the big railways and the small railways. Let the muck-raker gather them all in. Let us have a clean house. 292 Socialism Inevitable EFFECT OF THE EARTHQUAKE ON SOCIALISM (May, 1906.) THE earthquake in California by the destruction of some hundreds of millions of dollars of property will help enormously toward continuing "prosperity" in this country. What the present competitive system needs above all things else is a "market," and the earthquake will force California to be the largest and best buyer in the world for the next two years. She will not only have the hundreds of millions of insurance money to spend, but will borrow millions in addition. There will, in fact, be no shortage of money. I have been saying that unless we should have a great war this country will witness a profound period of depression within two years, the result of an inevitable overproduction. But I did not count on an earthquake. I now wish to extend the time : the California earthquake should put off the crisis at least one year longer. In the meantime there should be a great boom in the stocks of all kinds of railways and in- dustrial corporations, and in real estate. Even land values in San Francisco will rise far beyond the values that obtained before the earthquake. There is now some twaddle being uttered to the effect that San Francisco may not be rebuilt because people will be afraid to live there. The man who talks this way must have a theory that people choose their place of residence because of their health, whereas, as a matter of fact, they do so in order to get a living. San Francisco is the natural port of the Pacific slope, and has the best harbor in the world. With such advantages it will always pay men to trade there, and men will always be found where there is good pay. If danger were to keep men away from their occupations, there would be few men working in our white lead factories, our coal mines, or in tunnel work under rivers. Does the fact Effect of the Earthquake on Socialism 293 that tens of thousands of men are annually killed and injured upon our railways prevent the companies from securing as many employees as they want? San Francisco might have an earthquake every month, and yet there would be no diffi- culty in hiring all the men required. The aid extended from all parts of the world to the stricken people in California shows how strong is the instinct of brotherhood resting latent in the breast of all of us. It also shows that this brotherhood does not stop at national boundary lines, as Eoosevelt by his refusal of foreign aid would have it do. Without that instinct the world indeed would be a chaos. On the other hand, the necessity of martial law to prevent the looting of the ruins shows that the competitive system has so deeply demoralized men that they will take advantage of one another even in such a state of universal calamity. The earthquake has shown at once both the best and the worst in us. P. S. Probably no prediction I ever made was received with more scorn only to be triumphantly fulfilled than the foregoing. G. W., Dec. 14, 1907. 294 Socialism Inevitable FEUDALISM VERSUS CAPITALISM IN RUSSIA (May, 1906.) THE time is ripe in Russia for Capitalism to displace Feudalism. Her industries are now far enough ad- vanced absolutely to require Capitalism for further development, though hardly far enough to require Socialism. Feudalism was good enough for society when there were no railroads or factories; but with the growth of capital, as the result of the invention and use of the steam engine, and of various labor-saving devices, the system of Capitalism, as we know it, has been developed. Yet the capitalistic class in Russia is a comparatively new class of men. The oFd ruling class, the nobility and land owners, are now sneering and looking down upon them, but just as soon as the value of capital outweighs that of the land, the capitalists will domin- ate the land owners, and Capitalism will supplant Feudalism as it has done elsewhere throughout Europe. That the Russian government, however, neither understands nor foresees all this is certain, as is shown by the following trivial but suggestive incident, recorded in the daily press : The Communal Court at Widzewo has ordered the Messrs. Coates, thread manufacturers, to pay their 800 employees for the time they have lost since December 30th, when the factory was closed, until to-day. The Court held that the plea offered by the manufacturers for closing their factory, that there was scarcity of coal, was in- sufficient reason for shutting down their works, as coal was obtainable at high prices. It seems to that feudalistic court of Widzewo that whether Coates & Company make money or not they should run their factory merely to keep their men employed and to avoid any disturbance to society. The fact that coal is high in price argues nothing to the court. The bankruptcy of capitalists like Coates & Company is of no moment compared with the Feudalism vs. Capitalism in Russia 295 bankruptcy of the feudal system. In the feudal regime there was no such thing as people starving so long as there was food. Starvation then came from famine and underproduc- tion : to-day it -comes from people being out of work merely because capitalists cannot hire them at a profit. And such a condition, of course, is quite incomprehensible to those who entertain the feudal notion of things as does the Russian Government. Now when the capitalists supplant the land-owning class as the controlling force in politics, there will be no more such absurdity as ordering a manufacturer to run his mill when he cannot do so without losing money. In other words, the capitalist government, unlike the present feudal regime, will understand what is possible from a capitalist standpoint. And yet this increased intelligence, as we well know in this country, will not go far toward feeding the unemployed laborer; and as soon as the laborer understands this, he will be the first to demand the abolition of the capitalist system itself, and the inauguration of the Socialist system. This is what is now happening in America and is the logical sequence of events in Russia. It may be objected that the Czar's interference with the' affairs of the Coates Company was no different from President Roosevelt's interference in the recent coal strike ; yet it must be borne in mind that in one case the Czar ordered the capital- ists to give work, whereas Roosevelt merely suggested that it should be done. Roosevelt indeed has no power beyond mere suggestion. The assumption that the President is the head of the nation is quite absurd. The time when our political officers con- trolled things, passed away with the appearance of our Cap- tains of Industry. They are the men who are now our real political leaders. To-day the man that can give valid orders that laborers shall or shall not go to work in America, as does the Czar in Russia, is not Roosevelt, he is the capitalist, the man who owns the machinery of production. He is the only one who is in position to make his order effective. For instance, Mr. Roosevelt suggested that the operators arbitrate with the miners; whereas Mr. Corey, the president of the Steel Trust, 296 Socialism Inevitable autocratically ordered them to do so, saying that if they did not he would break his coal contract. "The Steel Trust must have coal, and you must pay your workmen sufficient wages to get it. We pay you enough for your coal, and we will not allow you to cut us off and make us shut down our steel mills, in order that you can gouge a little more profit out of your workingmen." This order from Corey to Baer was imperative, and had immediate effect, whereas the suggestion from Eoosevelt was received with considerable irritation by many of the coal operators who said the President had no right to interfere. It was none of his business; but when Corey, the President of the Billion Dollar Steel Trust, spoke, there was not a single coal operator that dared peep. Socialism: A Eeligion 297 SOCIALISM: A RELIGION (June, 1906.) I THINK most Socialists will agree that until the belief in Socialism gets hold of the hearts and emotions of the people more as a religion than as an understanding / of economic events, there is not likely to be a Social Kevolu- tion. In the first place, the economics of Socialism are not sufficiently easy of explanation to the general public for us to gain a large following in any short period of time. Men usually have taken up a political faith, not because they have arrived at it from a course of logical reasoning, but because they have gained it through their emotions. This "admission, however, does not necessarily imply that such faith rests on a false foundation. It may or may not. Every period of depression in this country has awakened a feeling of revolt among the ones affected injuriously, and they have sought, in the past, to remedy their ills by a variety of panaceas. It is not so many years since we regarded greenbacks as the great and only remedy for human ills. Later on we pinned our hopes to Mr. Bryan and free silver. To-day there is a marked tendency among the people to place their faith in Socialism. In each case the method by which the greater part of the believers in greenbacks, free silver, and Socialism arrived at their conclusions, was much more through their hearts and emotions than through their brains. But because we have been wrong at least twice, it does not follow that now, when we decide upon Socialism, we must be wrong for the third time. It has been rightly said that it is much easier to sympathize with suffering than with happiness; that is, where ten men will sympathize with you, wishing for Socialism because it will alleviate suffering, there is only one who will go with you because it promises a world of happiness and beauty. There are three classes of men to whom the Socialist ap- peals; first, the large mass of humanity who wish a change 298 Socialism Inevitable because they themselves are actually suffering from poverty. Second, another large mass of people who, while they them- selves are not suffering from poverty, wish to see the suf- ferings of others alleviated. Third, a class, and a very much smaller class, who picture the earth made into one divinely beautiful garden for man in the state of complete happiness, and who are Socialists because of that ideal. The best Socialist is one who can not only sympathize with poverty and wish to alleviate it, but who has the imag- ination to see the world of beauty, which Socialism promises, as the goal to be reached. In this day of machine production it is not difficult to show that we can produce more than enough to banish poverty. \ There was a day when poverty was the result of under- I production, famine, and war. The world was hungry because J there was not enough to eat. To-day, hunger and want ex- / ists in civilized countries not because there is not enough/ produced, but because we don't know properly how to distribi ute the product. If we could properly distribute what we produce without at the same time checking production, no economist would deny that the problem of poverty could be solved. Under our competitive system a man is paid, not accord- ing to what he produces, but according to what he may sell his labor for in the competitive market. The employer buys labor just as he buys any other material. If he is making shoes he figures out how much the labor cost is, how much the leather cost, how much his rent and interest are, etc. He cannot pay higher for his labor than his competitors do v any more than he can pay higher for his leather, that is, not if he expects to sell his shoes against them in competi- tion. On the other hand, the man who sells his labor, just as the man who sells leather, must sell at the market rate; other- wise he cannot dispose of his product, labor. If Jones offers his labor for $2.00 a day to the employer, it is just as hopeless for Smith to try to sell his labor for $2.50 as it would be to ask $2.50 a pound for leather which the employer could buy for $2.00. If there are plenty of men who are willing to sell their labor at $2.00 a day and their leather at $2.00 a pound, then, of course, the price of leather, or of Socialism: A Keligion 299 labor, cannot rise above $2.00. There are always men out of employment in the United States, even in times of prosperity, so that it is futile to expect that wages can rise very much above the amount demanded by the unemployed, which is just about enough to keep them from starving. Hence, under our existing conditions, remuneration to the workingman must always remain approximately at the very point of sub- sistence, no matter how much more than a subsistence the worker may produce. The reason of this holding down of wages to the point of bare subsistence is the competitive system, and so long as that system exists, the workingmen cannot expect to get more, at best, than a mere living. Hence, no matter how much we may increase in productivity, the laborer will find it impossible to share in the increase. The average annual wage to-day is somewhat less than $500 per worker; while the annual product has been estimated at about $2,000; but whether it be $2,000 or $20,000 makes no difference so far as the laborer is concerned, because under the competitive system he cannot possibly get any more than this living wage of $500. The surplus is automatically dumped into the laps of the employing class into the hands of the owners of the land and of the machinery of produc- tion. Of course, it often happens that some individual em- ployer may get very little, if any, of this surplus. He may have to part with all his profits to pay his landlord, if he is a manufacturer in the city of New York, or, if he is a farmer in the West, he may be forced to pay his gains to the railroad, and so on. The employing class the capitalists utilize this auto- matic surplus from the product of the laborer in two ways. First, they spend part of it, and secondly, they invest part of it. We may pass by the question of what they spend as being relatively of no economic importance since it is not a channel that can be automatically enlarged in times of emer- gency. It is the investment of capital in savings which ab- sorbs a great part of the surplus product of labor. This is the part that goes to build our railroads, our manufactories and our industrial undertakings as a whole. It is the oppor- tunity for the investing of savings that to-day creates, and is responsible for, our present prosperity, So long as the 300 Socialism Inevitable capitalist can see an opportunity for the profitable investing of his surplus he will invest, which means that he will con- tinue to employ labor, build new railroads, etc.; but let it once come to the point where there is no profit to be made in the further building of railroads, or of oil refineries, then you may be sure that he will stop. This is the situation that the Socialist sees will sooner or later confront the capitalist class, viz., the inability to invest their surplus, and, conse- quently, the inability to employ labor, from which, of course, a great unemployed problem must ensue. It might be thought by some that there is an unlimited opportunity for the building of new machinery, but the Trust is in evidence as a contradiction of such an assump- tion. The Trust is a white flag hung out by competitive capitalistic armies announcing their surrender to monopoly and to combination. Over-production threatens their ex- istence. But the Trust is only a temporary remedy, for we must bear in mind that all this industrial equipment is for the purpose of manufacturing goods to be distributed to the working class who, according to our original analysis, have only about $500 a year with which to buy the product; and as under the competitive system this $500 cannot be in- creased, it is not at all difficult to see how man with modern machinery can produce more than he can buy. The wonder is, therefore, not that we are threatened with over-production to-day, but that we were not overwhelmed with it years ago. We must remember, however, the many technical improve- ments in production, which have been so revolutionary that no sooner has one piece of machinery been purchased than another has been invented to take its place, whereupon the first has been torn down and the new one installed, thus giving employment to labor. But this building of new, to supersede old, machinery has at last come to a stop, and the Trust is the sign that the climax has been reached. Two years ago we were threatened with a period of great depression, but along came the Eusso-Japanese war to dis- tribute goods in great quantity, and at the same time to draw more than a million men from the labor army of the world, resulting, of course, in a tremendously increased demand for the products of Western Europe and of the United States. Socialism: A Keligion 301 The San Francisco earthquake, moreover, will have a ten- dency to prolong the stimulus given by the war, but this stimulus is now rapidly wearing off, and it will not be many months before there is a decided fall in prices and a great decline in the demand for labor. This means that a great unemployed problem is approaching, and that the nation, now in its heyday of prosperity, is soon to be confronted with a terrible economic crisis. In the previous periods of depression we looked to super- ficial remedies for relief. We were like quacks who would attempt to cure smallpox by treating the eruption. But the Socialist sees that it is useless to try to alleviate poverty so long as the cause of poverty, viz., the competitive system, is spared. Hence he would abolish the competitive, and sub- stitute the co-operative system, which merely means the dis- tribution of what the worker produces, rather than the mini- mum upon which he can live. To do this, however, it is necessary to own the machinery of production; that is, it would be absurd to try to establish a co-operative common- wealth if the trusts and railroads were left in the hands of the Gould- Vanderbilt-Harriman-Eockefeller-Astor Company. It is necessary for us, the people as a whole, to own and operate these great machines of production, and to distribute the product to ourselves as workers, not upon the basis of how little we can use, but of what we produce, If by virtue of modern machinery we can produce one hundred times our output without machinery, then let us have a product one- hundredfold greater, instead of taking only ten per cent, and allowing ninety per cent, of it to rest as an unused accumu- lation in the hands of the capitalists, thereby justifying them in saying that there is over-production and, consequently, no opportunity to give us work. I have herein sketched the economic basis of Socialism, and if it be difficult of understanding to many readers, my original contention that we will not gain the day through an appeal to the understanding so much as through an appeal to the heart, will have been amply proved. For we can all feel for the man who is suffering from hunger, and can see the absurdity of his being hungry merely because there is so much bread that there is no opportunity to hire him either in the wheat fields, the flour mill or the bake shop. 302 Socialism Inevitable Even in this present period of "prosperity/' the growth of the Socialistic undercurrent of sentiment is apparent to everyone, not only in the increased Socialistic vote in all parts of the world, but particularly in the current literature of the day. By this I refer equally to the exposures of graft that are filling the magazines, and to the writings of our Gorkys, Tolstois, Zolas, Londons, Sinclairs, and other men of genius who are voicing the cry of the disinherited. It is impossible for a man even though he be in perfect health, with the exception, say, of a crushed ringer, to be happy until the pain from his ringer has departed, and human- ity is just as much a living organism as is a man's body. We cannot have a single member of our great organization hurt without all of us suffering, just as the man with the crushed finger feels pain throughout his body, although only his ringer is affected. Even the most hard-hearted of men will admit that he could not sit down to eat his dinner with any pleasure and have alongside of him a hungry man who, because of poverty, could not share his food. Fundamentally, it is just as much an instinct to relieve a brother's distress as to relieve 7 the pain of a crushed finger, and Socialists, recognizing tl /interdependence of humanity, calls upon it to further the I movement which would relieve all universal pain, that is, j poverty. ***? On the other hand, merely relieving humanity of the pai of poverty is only the first step toward putting it in a posi- tion properly to enjoy life. The man with the injured finger does not regard it as the end of life simply to be relieved of pain. The end of life is to experience happiness, a positive, not merely a negative condition; and man's greatest enjoy- ment lies in the exercising of his functions, first of the physical, then of the intellectual and the spiritual. With poverty abolished from the earth, men will be relieved of the necessity of attending to their material needs or, at least, such attention will be inconsequential and will devote them- selves to living their spiritual lives. Keligion, therefore, in its broader and higher sense is this relating of man to the universe, and Socialism is the path to this great end. Our poets and artists are simply men who best experience an emotional contact with all humanity, and wfeo pan give to their emotions a visible form, in their poems Socialism: A Keligion 303 and statues, that all may see and enjoy. When Socialism comes, men will not only feel happy individually, but will also be conscious of their perfect relation to a happy humanity, and that humanity, as a whole, will feel its relation to each indi- vidual. Then all men will be poets and artists, and then, indeed, will come the birth of the Superman. The greatest inspiration, therefore, that can come to the spirit of man is that he realize himself at one with the universe. This comes, however, only when men are as per- fectly related to each other and to humanity as the cells in the living body are related to each other and to the body as a whole. Men must be united to humanity in an organiza- tion at once perfectly democratic and perfectly autocratic. With this advent all humanity will be at one with God, and every man will be a god. Such is the glorious ideal of the Socialist, an ideal that inspires him with a religious ecstasy to which no emotion that has hitherto stirred the world can compare. \ t 304 Socialism Inevitable THE BOOM OF 1906 (July, 1906.) SOME day, and a not very distant day either, people will look back with wonder upon the "boom of 1906." We are now witnessing the greatest period of insane specu- lation that this American nation of speculators has ever ex- perienced ; and the singular part of it is that notwithstanding all we should have learned from the past about the ephemeral character of such booms hardly one warning voice has been raised, while the big financiers and bankers who should be the men to warn us of an impending panic are the very ones who are pushing along the boom harder than any other class. What, may I ask, is there to justify all this construction of new houses, stores, factories, and railways from one end of the country to the other? Certainly not the increase of population, either natural or from immigration. For every American born and for every foreign immigrant, we are to-day building house-room for at least five. And yet only two years ago we were practically facing a commercial depression, a condition known as overproduction. We then had apparently too many houses, railways and fac- tories. Does any one mean to say that in the intervening two years population has so increased that all this tremendous demand for goods is justified? Of course not. Then if two years ago we could not use up what we were producing and if conditions to-day are practically the same, how is it that now we do not seem able to produce enough for consumption ? Why such a change? It all begun from the demand upon us to supply the waste of the Japanese-Eussian war. From that demand there arose a necessity for manufacturing establishments, while at the same time the demand for our farm products to feed the belligerents caused a general rise in food stuffs. This demand for the building of factories meant an in- creased demand for labor, and the demand for labor of course The Boom of 1906 305 meant higher wages. Both the American farmer and the American laborer have had more money to spend and they have spent it. Goods of all kinds as a consequence have been in demand. More shoes were wanted, more theatres were patron- ized, more luxuries were bought, all of which has meant a demand for more factories. Now each factory that has been built calls for still other factories and industries to furnish the machinery to build the first. When a new factory is built it creates a demand for lumber; this may mean the building of a new railroad into a new lumber camp to haul out the lumber, which in turn may mean the building of a new steel rail mill to make more rail. The building of the rail mill may mean the opening of a new iron mine which may require still another new railway to haul the ore, new steamships to carry the ore on the lakes, and new piers for the steamers. Furthermore, new steamers need paint, more paint means more lead and zinc mines must be opened, etc., etc. And all these new enterprises mean a greater demand for labor, still higher wages, more demand for farm products and inflated prices all along the line for all commodities. At first the demand caused by the Japanese war was met by our selling goods and farm products at the normal price prevailing two years ago; then, as the demand increased prices naturally rose and traders and manufacturers made more and more profits. Then, as prices of secondary com- modities needed in the production of the primary products also rose, profits fell off and a further rise in the price of primary goods took place to restore profits to the original status. For instance, first the price of steel advanced, then the price of iron ore went up, then the price of steel again advanced on account of the higher price of ore. Labor likewise remained for a time at the old level, but the increased demand and especially the increased cost of living, caused it finally to rise along with the other com- modities, although by no means in proportion to the general cost of living. This means that labor is really not consuming any more than it did before the boom, because the higher wages it now gets do not give it any more real purchasing power. As a matter of fact the largely increased production is altogether absorbed by the increased investments of the 306 Socialism Inevitable capitalists in new machinery of consumption, new railways, etc. Now the starting point for all this boom, as has been shown, was the Japanese war, and we are still running on the start that it afforded us. So that unless another war comes along to give us another boost our boom is as sure to soon stop short as a clock is to run down unless some one re-winds it. There is no more possibility of perpetual motion in con- nection with the present system than there is with an eight- day clock. The problem with us Americans is what to do when our industrial clock runs down and stops. As I write these lines, the first of July, 1906, while prices are booming as never before, while there has never been such building activity, while the banks and the United States treasury were never so flooded with money, while corpora- tion dividends were never so great, while there is an un- precedented boom in real estate throughout the whole American continent, for Canada, too, is with the United States in the same mad race, I say with all these favorable conditions in trade, and without a cloud upon the financial sky, it seems madness to predict that within a twelve-month all will be reversed and the country will be in a state of panic, and yet I give the present boom just one year to reach its zenith and collapse. I predict also that when the collapse does come it will have an infinitely greater social effect than any other previous crisis. We are about to plunge suddenly from the present condition of unbounded prosperity to unprecedented depres- sion. Merchants and manufacturers who to-day hardly know what to do with their enormous profits will then be terrified to know how to avoid bankruptcy. Workingmen who are now scorning the highest wages ever paid in the history of the country will then be cringing at soup kitchens, glad to be fed by charity. The trade unions will be wrecks. The Socialist Party and the Socialist press alone will be booming. Now, we have had other such crises in this country when times have been as hard as those I have just predicted will shortly came upon us, but in the past the people generally, and labor in particular, looked upon such a crisis as an unavoidable natural event. Men regarded times then as they regarded yellow fever two years ago in New Orleans before the infection The Boom of 1906 307 was found to lie in the bite of a mosquito. A panic and yellow fever were alike a visitation of God for which there was little or nothing to be done but to sit down and wait until it passed, then to get up, bury the dead, count the survivors and await its reappearance. But to-day, when yellow fever comes to New Orleans, in- stead of sitting down and doing nothing, they busy themselves in getting rid of the mosquito-breeding pools, screening the cisterns where mosquitoes breed, and even screening their bed-rooms as an extra precaution. It is now recognized that without mosquitoes yellow fever cannot be transmitted. The mosquito bites a person infected with fever, then bites another person and thus conveys the disease. It took quite a little time to educate the people in New Orleans to this danger, and the mosquito theory met with all kinds of ridicule, but the last epidemic convinced all classes as to its soundness. The fear of death is a great schoolmaster and it will be the fear of death which will teach the American people in our next economic crisis the scientific method to avoid starva- tion. We will at last see that the mosquitoes which sap our strength and poison our blood are the capitalists. We will see that as long as we surfer the capitalist mosquito to puncture our veins and drain our blood we must necessarily be poverty-stricken. We will see that it is impossible to get rid of the capitalist mosquito as long as we allow the pools and gutters of competition and private ownership of capital to remain. So we will set to work and drain our pools as did the people of New Orleans. We will turn to and fill up the capitalist swamps which breed our capitalist mosquitoes. We will open up the mighty river of Socialism, a great, clearing, running stream, which will carry man upon its broad bosom to a land of health and plenty. All this literature of exposure which is now going on, all the muck-raking, the Beef Trust scandals, the life insurance frauds, the railway rebating, all, all is slowly educating the public to the nature of our present system. We no longer venerate our capitalist leaders any more than the Russians of to-day venerate the Tsar. We are merely waiting, patiently, and looking for an opportunity to get rid of them. Just now 308 Socialism Inevitable our society is like a man carrying a pack through the Canadian forest during the black fly season. He is bitten to distraction by the flies, but he cannot stop to fight them on account of the pack. But because he doesn't brush them off doesn't mean that he doesn't want to brush them off. He is merely biding his time. That is just our position. We are too busy making money and drawing wages to attend to our capitalist mosqui- toes. But we know they are biting us all right. And we know they are of no more benefit to us than are the black flies to the man carrying the pack. We know they are annoy- ing pests, but we don't know yet that they are as deadly as the yellow fever mosquitoes. New Orleans never liked the mosquito, but it never really fought them until it found them not only annoying but deadly. Let the next crisis come and my prediction is that it will be here before August, 1907, unless another great war breaks out and we will see the American people do some much more lively mosquito hunting than any one to-day would think possible. We are now producing wealth in unprecedented quantity, and no one can deny that everyone could be provided for in a generous manner. At the same time we are diverting an enormous quantity of our labor force to the building of more machinery for use in the future. We are building a two- hundred-million-dollar canal at Panama, a new hundred- million-dollar steel plant at Gary, Indiana, half a dozen rail- way enterprises are going on and each costs over a hundred million dollars. Millions and millions are going into new houses and factories. If one-quarter of the capital we are now putting into new machinery were devoted to the making of more goods for immediate consumption by the working class, it is difficult to compute how great would be the ensuing good and comfort to the recipients. In addition to these immense "savings" being made, our millionaires are wasting millions upon millions on luxuries which alone is evidence that we are producing enough and more than enough for all. Unquestionably we have right now both labor and capital at hand sufficient to give us all a good living. But suppose in a year from to-day there is a crisis coming and instead of labor and capital being well employed, both The Boom of 1906 309 are idle. Suppose, instead of the greater part of the working class being comparatively well clothed and well fed, the greater part of them are hungry and out of work. Does any one think that the workers will have memories so short as not to be able to look back one short year and contrast their position then and now ? Does any one think that the working class in their present frame of mind are going to submit to starvation for any considerable time and be calmed by the explanation that the whole trouble is "overproduction ?" It may be asked, "What are they going to do about it ?" I can answer right now what they are going to do about it. They are going to demand Socialism, and they are going to insist on their demand, too. It may be said that they cannot do anything without organization. To this I reply that the germ of the future organization which is to free the workers is already at hand, namely, the Socialist Party. It is true that to-day it is of com- paratively insignificant size and strength, but this is merely because conditions have been unfavorable to its growth, viz., too much prosperity. It has the right frame work, it has the right principles, it is headed in the right direction. Let the winds of an economic crisis blow and the country will be astonished to see how quickly the driftwood in the labor stream will form a great raft which, under the guidance of the Socialist Party, will ferry us across the river Styx of capitalism to the Elysian Fields of Socialism. 310 Socialism Inevitable A WILSHIRE PROPHECY OF 1889 (April, 1907.) WHEN I first began to talk about the Trust Problem, some twenty years or more ago, people looked upon me as a crank. I would, therefore, be glad to have my readers call the attention of scoffers to the following letter which I wrote about eighteen years ago. Does it not sound as if it might have been written yesterday? Can any other letter upon the Trust, giving such a remarkably true forecast, be found outside the writings of Socialists ? If so, I should like to see it. (A letter published in the Los Angeles Evening Express, Septem- ber 21, 1889.) A TREATISE ON THE TRUSTS. To the Editor, Los Angeles Evening Express: The question of the day is, "How shall Trusts and Monopo- lies be exterminated?" To say that the life of the Kepublic hangs on this issue sounds florid and rhetorical, but I shall endeavor to justify the statement by a few observations. It will be readily admitted that inasmuch as every man must have food as a prime necessity that if one man gains control of our food supply he can exact all the wealth of the country in exchange for food. He would have far more authority over the life and property of the American people than the Czar has over the Eussians. For another illustration of the power of monopoly, suppose there are three men on an island, and that one at one end owns the only supply of fresh water, one at the other end the only supply of food, and the third acts as a common carrier between them, and has an absolute control of the only road connecting the water supply with the food supply. It can be seen that the carrier might easily put his charges up to such an exorbitant figure that he would soon own all the pos- sessions of the other two men. Now it is generally admitted Wilshire Prophecy of 1889 311 that transcontinental associations of railways, pooling ar- rangements, and Mr. Jay Gould's proposed railroad clearing house are but the precursors of some form of combination of the different lines of railways in this country under one system. The revelations in the Senate inquiry in Chicago last week as to the operations of the dressed-beef association, or Beef Trust, are most portentous. It was shown that Mr. Armour had complete control of the business. He makes men sell to him at his price or crushes them. It is notable, too, that never do the consumers gain, for Mr. Armour's selling-price seems to have no relation to his buying-price. The Flour Mill Trust in the Northwest seems to be almost as well organized as the Beef Trust, the price of flour no longer fluctuates with the price of wheat. Petroleum is, as every one knows, an article whose selling- price is fixed by the Standard Oil Trust. I will not extend the list of monopolized commodities, for I might include coal, thread, needles, in fact it is now assum- able that when an article is a manufactured staple, its price is pretty sure to be fixed arbitrarily by some trust controlling its production. One may say that we are very nearly arrived at the condi- tion of our three men upon the suppositious island whose food supply was controlled by one man who owned the only road. The process of concentration is irresistible and inevitable. When, for instance, one great Trust say the Standard Oil Trust has no further use for its profits in further extending its plant, when it is completed, it will naturally look for in- vestment in outside businesses. Knowing from its own ex- perience that no competitive business can equal a Trust for making big profits, it will either form a Trust in some other process of production or it will buy up a Trust already formed by other people. That this latter process of concentration is now going on is exemplified by the buying up of the Cotton Seed Oil Trust, and very recently, the White Lead Trust, by the Kockefeller people. It is the big fish eating the little fish, the survival of the fittest, and the logical end must be that every industry in this country will finally be owned and controlled by one huge Trust. 312 Socialism Inevitable Now, I do not pose as an alarmist, neither am I waving the red flag, but I do wish the future historian to say when he looks over the moth-eaten files of the Los Angeles Evening Express in the latter days of the Twentieth Century, that there were at least a few men who recognized the true mean- ing of the growth of Trusts in the United States in the Nineteenth Century. Faithfully yours, Gaylord Wilshibe. From Chance To Certainty 313 FROM CHANCE TO CERTAINTY (September, 1907.) DESPITE all his boasting man has really made little or no progress to which he was not driven by neces- sity. To do anything that is contrary to his usual habits requires the very greatest incentive ; often it must be a question of life itself to get him to move. It is well known that with animals even starvation will not make them change to food to which they are unaccustomed, even though the food is equally nutritious. We all of us remember how difficult it was as children to change to the vegetables and meats that were spread before our elders, and now, after we have acquired the taste, we look back at the days when oysters and olives were rejected and uneaten as time lost never to be retrieved. It is not so long ago that our fathers grew both potatoes and tomatoes purely for ornamental purposes, considering them as dangerous as toad-stools. It would hardly be rash to declare that man has only learned of the delights of such things as oysters, olives and potatoes by a threat of starvation did he not dare the experiment and not only is it logical to assume that man learned of the existence of other edibles than roots, berries and nuts through the stress of grim necessity, but that he has also learned new methods of getting food from the same schoolmaster. It was a great step forward when the first discoverer communicated to his brother man that there was milk in the cocoanut, but it has taken many thousand years for man to come to the conclusion that cocoanuts would be much more plentiful if he took the trouble to plant them rather than take a chance that nature would do it for him. However, civilized man has now pretty thoroughly learned the lesson that if he wants to be sure the earth shall bear him a proper food supply, the only safe way is to plant the seed himself and care for the plant until the fruit is safely gath- ered. Not only has he learned not to trust to the chance of 314 Socialism Inevitable nature doing the planting, but he is fast losing his confidence in her ability to furnish the proper supply of moisture to make the planting of avail. Artificial irrrigation is yearly coming to be more relied upon by man to secure to him the result of his labor in the fields. However, does any one think that he would have changed the happy-go-lucky system of getting his food from wild animals and wild plants to grazing and agriculture, if grim hunger and death had not been the angels with fiery swords, driving him from his Edenic garden of chance? The whole economic history of the race might be summed up in saying that Necessity has driven Man from chance to certainty, and in no development of industry is this same progress more clearly seen than when the Trust was formed to make the market a certainty for the manufacturer, when before its appearance all was a matter of chance. The To- bacco Trust, for instance, not only knows almost to an ounce how much tobacco it can with safety roll into cigarettes with- out overstocking the market, but it is not even leaving the question of distribution to the chance of the retailers handling the sales properly, for it is rapidly establishing its own retail stores in every large city in the country. But, while man has been so busy in lessening the element of chance in the production of what he wants, he has been strangely remiss in eliminating the chance that he may not get it after he has produced it. Hitherto he has gone on the theory that all he had to look out for was to produce enough, and that then, by some benevolent law of nature he would be sure of getting enough. In fact, even now you will find most men believing in this sufficiency of natural law, that is, that the food is sure to find its way into the hungry man's stomach, if only his hands have succeeded in producing enough of it. No doubt the history of man has given him a basis for belief in such a theory, as no one ever heard of savages going hungry when there was food within reach, any more than one could conceive of a troop of monkeys going hungry when the trees were heavy with cocoanuts. And it may be added that right up to the time when man began to use machinery in the pro- duction of goods he never went hungry, except when, as a result of famine, there was not enough to go around. But the moment steam was discovered man began to make goods with From Chance To Certainty 315 one-tenth of the labor, and in one-tenth of the time that he did before, and from that moment was confronted with a new problem, one that he never thought would ever be presented to him, namely, how to get food when there was too much of it. Overproduction and unemployment were once meaning- less terms. Man first began by taking a chance that he would get fed by nature, and when this did not always work out, he took systematically to directing natural forces so that he was sure of producing the food. But he never thought of the chance arising that he would not get food after he had produced it. And it was not unreasonable for him to think that since he always had gotten the cocoanuts when nature chanced to produce enough, that he would be equally sure of getting them when he took the trouble to plant a cocoanut grove, and to plant it by the seaside where the trees would get both the salt and the moisture necessary for a steady yield. But this is where man made a great mistake. He has learned the lesson that he must not take a chance on his Mother Nature giving him food, but has yet to learn that neither must he take a chance on his Brother Man giving it to him when Mother Nature has done her part. When the cocoanut grove was common property it was safe enough to count on getting the nuts if they were on the trees, but when he gave the grove to his Brother Man who directed the plant- ing of them, he found that he had another bridge to cross before he could be sure of getting his share. He has not taken the precaution to bind the owner of the grove, his newly-created capitalist, to give him the nuts. In other words, he took chances on the generosity of his Brother Man, and he has been fooled. However, he has not been fooled often enough, or long enough, yet for him to see that the same necessity that compelled him to free himself from con- trol of his Mother Nature, will finally force him to free him- self from his Brother Man. The cocoanut grove must not only be cultivated by man co-operatively, but must be owned co-operatively, if man is to be sure of the cocoanuts. Now the Socialist says that the earth should be owned by all men, and that the fruits thereof should be the joint prop- erty of all, to be distributed upon a basis of equity. To-day the cocoanut groves are the property of a few capitalists, who only distribute nuts to the people when they need their labor 316 Socialism Inevitable to cultivate the grove or to plant new trees. But the groves, which have been planted in the last few years, are now rapidly coming into bearing, hence nuts will soon be so plentiful that there will be no demand for new groves, so that those who have been getting nuts in exchange for their labor in the planting of more groves will soon be told that their services are no longer needed, as there are already too many nuts. It will be useless for them to demand nuts when the capitalists cannot use their labor, and then they will see what fools they were to neglect their future interests while their labor was in de- mand. The capitalists do not give nuts away because they have too many, they give nuts in exchange for labor to plant new groves, in the hope that the increased product will make them so much the richer. The richer they get the more groves they can plant, and the more groves they can plant the richer they get. To get rich is the end in life for the capitalist. This planting of more and more cocoanut trees would have gone on to the end of time, until the whole tropical world would have become a vast cocoanut grove, if only we could have eaten all the cocoanuts produced; but when the new groves had commenced to bear more nuts than we could eat, the capitalist owners would have cried out, "over-production," and stopped giving nuts as payment for the planting of more groves. This would be a very natural proceeding on their part, for why should they give nuts for the planting of new groves when it was most obvious that the present groves were already producing far more nuts than could be eaten? But while it was natural enough for the capitalists not to wish new groves, which would produce nuts that could not be used, it was equally natural for labor, which had hitherto been accustomed to get its nuts for the planting of the said groves, to raise a very strenuous howl when it found that its nut supply was suddenly shut off by "over-production." Now, if we can for a moment substitute some other commod- ity, say any well-known staple in the market, in place of cocoanuts, and consider the workers engaged in the produc- tion of that commodity, we may not have much difficulty in seeing what a complete parallel may be drawn between the imaginary primitive cocoanut industry and the real world industrial process of to-day. For instance, if you will look From Chance To Certainty 317 at your daily paper you will see that there has been a great break in the price of copper. Why ? Merely because copper is being produced faster than the market can absorb it. This slump, of course, will result in greatly reduced profits in copper mines which will mean that less men will be employed in mining copper, and that there will be less wages to buy things with. Now among the things that will be less in de- mand will be copper itself because at the beginning of our vicious circle copper was in less demand, therefore it ends by being still in less demand. Now is this not exactly what is happening to-day in our business world ? Is there much diffi- culty in substituting copper for cocoanuts and understanding the story of the cocoanut grove? Is it not obvious that if men wish to be sure of getting copper after they have pro- duced it, that it is just as necessary for them to own and operate their own copper mines as it is for them to own the trees and pick their own cocoanuts ? I have put myself on record as predicting that the com- mercial world was about to enter into a period of overproduc- tion and unemployment. The capitalists have been unusually prosperous for the past few years, planting out new cocoanut groves opening up new copper mines but we are now about to be told that the world has too many cocoanuts in other words, too much copper, too much iron, too much of every- things, and that, therefore, there is no demand for labor to produce anything. If we owned our own cocoanut groves we would simply let the cocoanuts grow and put only enough labor in the planting of new groves to keep up the necessary supply. If we happened to have so many nuts that we could not eat them all, instead of being worried lest we starve to death we would merely feel relieved to know that a certain amount of labor in the planting of new groves need no longer be diverted to that purpose. This would mean so much the more leisure for all, so much more leisure for man to devote to the cultivation of his soul rather than to the cultivation of cocoanut trees. However, we fear that even such a great end as the gaining of leisure to cultivate the soul, so as to give man that indi- vidual and social culture which will put him into emotional contact with all the universe, we say that even the gaining of such a great end as this will never move him to action. What 318 Socialism Inevitable will finally make him move will be the realization that his miserable body will perish unless he changes his social system, and incidentally in the saving of his body he will save his soul he will do so because he must. All of this goes to prove that Socialism, while ostensibly a materialistic philosophy, is basically spiritual. The Socialist says, save the body and the soul will save itself. Significance of the Trust 319 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE TRUST (July, 1902.) THE real danger of the Trust exists not in what it is to-day, but in what it promises for to-morrow. Most writers, unfortunately, have confined themselves too much to the most palpable features of the Trust. Anyone can see the menace to our institutions involved in the change from industry conducted on a competitive democratic basis to a monopolistic autocratic one, and the menace to labor is equally apparent if there be but one employer instead of ,a hundred. Anyone, moreover, can see, when the production of a commodity is controlled by a Trust, that prices may be put up to exorbitant figures. All these points are so obvious that it seems almost unnecessary to call attention to them. And not only is time wasted in expatiating upon these manifest dangers of the Trust; but the remedies suggested are usually so absurd that merely to outline them would ex- haust the readers' patience. It is the indication of what is to come wherein lies its most dangerous significance, for the * Trust signifies the near approach of a tremendous unemployed problem. A great change in public opinion regarding this issue hast occurred in the last few years. It is not so very long since all our public men and newspapers had but one solution for the problem. "The Trust must be destroyed," they said. To-day nobody in his senses looks to such a possibility, for the trusts are now admitted to be the natural and inevitable result of our competitive economic system. I do not propose dwelling at any length upon the inevitabil- ity of the Trust, therefore, as I regard the task as practically superfluous. The point I care more to emphasize is the impossibility, in an economic sense, of the permanence of the Trust. Let me say at once, however, before I raise false hopes in the breast of the classical economist, that I do not propose to show that the Trust must fall to pieces of its own weight, II 320 Socialism Inevitable and that competition will finally be restored, owing to the entrance of fresh capital. That would be an extremely foolish position to take after having asserted the inevitability and necessity of the Trust. Neither am I attempting a glittering paradox by first asserting the Trust's inevitability, and in the next breath declaring it ephemeral. The theory which I shall endeavor to demonstrate is that the natural and inevitable evolution of our industrial system is from competition under private ownership to monopoly under private ownership, and then from monopoly under private ownership to monopoly under public ownership. In declaring the impossibility of the per- manence of private monopoly, I speak simply from the stand- point of the political economist, and leave out of consideration political and industrial changes which may, or may not, result from the uprising of a long-suffering and indignant people. Public ownership of industry might be brought about next month if the people had a sufficient desire to effect it, but it is with the "must be" I shall deal, not with the "might be." I shall endeavor, then, to prove that public ownership Social- ism is approaching, not merely because it is desirable, but because it falls into the category of inexorable necessity. My first task will be to prove the necessity of the Trust, my next to prove the necessity of Socialism. The Trust had its origin in the desire of the manufacturers to protect themselves from overproduction, and the consequent mad and suicidal struggle to dispose of their surplus products. Overproduction arises because our productive capacity has been developed to the highest degree with labor-saving ma- chinery operated by steam and electricity, while our consump- tive capacity remains stunted by the competitive wage system which limits the laborers who constitute the bulk of our consumers to the mere necessaries of life. I will not tire the reader with weary statistics showing the enormous strides that have taken place in man's productive capacity, due to modern machinery, nor will I harrow his soul with the well-worn details of the narrow, sordid life of squalor lived by our workers. It is patent to everyone that the wage- worker of to-day consumes but little, if any, more of the necessaries of life than did his grandfather. Consumption, per capita, of beef, flour, potatoes, coffee, tobacco, wool, etc., Significance of the Trust 321 has varied but slightly in the last fifty years. Every student of history knows in a general way that the ordinary laborers of this country, even a hundred years ago, lived in a fair degree of comfort, were warmly clad in their homespun, and comfortably housed in their log cabins. The best proof of this is their remarkably fine physical development, their longevity, and their freedom from disease. The average family was from ten to fourteen, for neither husband nor wife had the dread of an addition to the family that is so characteristic to-day. Kace suicide, in fact, is a purely modern development. I do not think that any fair-minded person will assert that the modern day laborer on his $1.50 a day, and very uncertain of that, living in a city, wearing shoddy clothes, breathing sewer gas, eating tuberculous beef, drinking typhoid bacilli in his milk and fusel oil in his whiskey, and absorbing intel- lectual garbage from his yellow journal, has had any great augmentation in the pleasures of life through the marvelous inventions of the nineteenth century. Labor and capital are jointly producing a constantly in- creasing quantity of wealth, but under the workings of the competitive wage system the workers can never get more than merely the necessaries of life, while the capitalists, simply by virtue of their ownership of capital must get the whole of the remainder. As production is increased, day by day, through improved methods, the share of the capitalists natur- ally increases pro rata while the share of the workers remains as it was, viz., the bare necessaries of life. Hence the workers, as a class, must remain in poverty while the capitalists, as a class, must get richer and richer. A huge part of the product of labor falls automatically into the lap of the holders of wealth in the form of rent, with no economic obligation on their part to render any service in return. Witness the enormous incomes of the Duchess of Marlborough and the Countess Castellane, representing the Vanderbilt and Gould wealth in Europe, and discover, if you can, any return that they render to the American people. It is possible that someone might so strain his imagination as to believe that the Astors, the Eockefellers, and the Vander- bilts, who, among them, have an income in the neighborhood of one thousand million a year, perform some economic good in return, but I doubt if their most generous retainer would 322 Significance of the Trust assert that a hundred thousand dollars a year, each, would not be sufficient compensation, considering the fact that our college professors receive, on an average, less than one thou- sand dollars. The stream of wealth flowing into the coffers of the rich is itself subdivided into two streams, one of which goes to satisfy what they are pleased to regard as their necessities of existence, a wonderful conglomeration of beef -steaks, truf- fles, champagne, automobiles, 'private cars, steam yachts, polo ponies, golf outfits, picture galleries, food and clothing for their servants, etc., all classified under the general head of consumables, and paid for by "spent" money. The other division of the stream is what is termed "saved" money, and flows into the building of new machinery of pro- duction, new railroads, canals, iron furnaces, mills, etc. And it is this channel of "saved," or invested, money that has provided the main outlet for the surplus product income of the rich and thereby prevented a plethora in our industrial system. Notwithstanding the fact that the prodigality of the Ameri- can rich is the wonder of the age, their number is so small proportionately, that all their efforts in lavish "spending" have had little economic effect compared to the wealth they are forced to "save," owing to their lack of ingenuity in de- vising new modes for "spending." There is, therefore, a grim satisfaction in the reflection that the saving capacity of the nation is increased by the concentration of wealth in the Eockefeller and Vanderbilt families. Thrift is no longer such a difficult virtue when it requires more labor to spend than it does to save, and this is the predicament of the very rich Americans. No man cares for two dinners, and when Mr. Eockefeller with his hundred million a year spends more than a thousand dollars a day on himself and his household, he finds it both pleasanter and easier to "save" the remainder of his income than to lie awake nights devising bizarre ways of spending it or even disposing of it to colleges or libraries. However, as conditions exist at present in the business world, it must be admitted that it is about as difficult for him to discover new openings in which to invest his savings as it is to invent ways Socialism Inevitable 323 to spend it. I pity him. What use is money if you can neither spend it joyfully nor invest it profitably ? Years ago when Eockefeller first went into the business of refining oil, he was not bothered with the problem of invest- ing his profits, first, because they were not so large as to be cumbersome; and, secondly, because the oil business itself, notwithstanding sharp competition, was a fairly profitable one and it gave ample scope for the re-investment of his earnings. His competitors, however, also re-invested their earnings in the oil business, until the capacity for refining oil finally became greater than the market demanded. Each refiner was then bound to get rid of his surplus product as best he could, and as the price of the surplus determined that of the whole prices consequently sank to such a ruinously low figure that bankruptcy stared them in the face. Overproduction simply had to be curtailed, combination was the only remedy, and thus the Standard Oil Trust was born. All this has been brought out time and again in the many Federal and State inquiries into the affairs of this Trust, and in the Congressional investigation of 1888 Eockefeller com- pletely proved that competition was ruining his business, and that combination had become an absolute necessity. His testimony, furthermore, has never been seriously questioned; but politicians saw the chance to make political capital out of it, and without attempting to controvert his statements, began to urge the destruction of the Oil Trust. However, notwith- standing all their efforts to overturn the laws of nature and make water run up hill, Eockefeller persisted in combining and making money instead of losing it by following their plan of competition. Capital, like water, seeks its own level. When no Trust is on guard to intimidate would-be investors, abnormally large profits will induce the flow of fresh capital into any business until normal conditions have been reached. Hence, as may be inferred, if capital was invested in oil refineries, notwith- standing the unpromising outlook, it was an indication that other businesses were in the same state of plethora, and could offer no better inducements. That this was actually the case has been fully substantiated by the subsequent formation of trusts in many other lines of manufacture, to prevent the 324 Socialism Inevitable same plethora of capital that had been a^ecting the oil busi- ness. The great industrial undertakings of the world, so far as present developments would indicate, are practically finished. As the late David A. Wells says in his Recent Economic Changes: "It would seem indeed as if the world during all the years since the inception of civilization has been working upon the line of equipment for industrial effort inventing and perfecting tools and machinery, building workshops and factories, and devising instrumentalities for the easy commu- nication of persons and thoughts ; that this equipment having at last been made ready, the work of using it has, for the first time in our day and generation, fairly begun; and also that every community under prior or existing conditions of use and consumption, is becoming saturated, as it were, with its re- sults." There is certainly no country in which the industrial machinery is so overbuilt as in the United States. We are saturated with capital, and can absorb no more. Under normal conditions the output of the machinery of production in three days is more than we can consume in a week, and the present boom is recognized by all to be of the most ephemeral nature. Now as a general law in economics it may be stated that the tendency to combination increases both with the increased capital in each competing plant, and with the decrease of the actual competitors. In 1890 there were 910 establishments manufacturing agricultural implements, with a capital of 145 millions. In 1900 we have but 715 establishments, al- though the total capitalization has increased to 157 millions. In establishments manufacturing salt, the number has de- creased during the past ten census years from 200 to 159, while the capitalization has increased more than 100 per cent., or from thirteen to twenty-seven millions. Slaughtering establishments, likewise, have decreased in number from 1,118 to 921, while their total capitalization has increased from 116 to 189 millions. As a matter of fact, all three of these industries are in the hands of a Trust, but the capitalists so juggle their reports that the census reports fail to show the truth. Perhaps the most striking returns, however, are those of the carriage and wagon factories, which have decreased in number Significance of the Trust 325 from 8,614 to 7,632, while their capitalization has increased from 104 to 118 millions. And the most note-worthy fact is that the number of wage-earners has decreased from 64,259 to 62,540, while the "salaried" employees clerks, salesmen, etc., are now actually fifty per cent, less than in 1890, or 4,311 as against 9,194. The cutting off of "salaried" em- ployees means a saving, according to the census, of $3,459,289 a year to the carriage makers. The figures from the flour mills also show the same trend toward the elimination of superfluous employees. The total capital invested in flour milling has increased in the last ten years from 208 to 218 millions, but the number of wage- earners has decreased from 47,403 to 37,073. "Salaried" employees have been reduced from 16,078 to 5,790, and the millers are paying out $3,492,590 less per annum for salaries to-day than ten years ago. More recent statistics still show the same tendency. A table compiled by the well-known statistician, Mr. Lucien Sanial, shows the figures pertaining to twenty-seven typical man- ufacturing industries for the years 1880, 1900 and 1905. In the first mentioned year the number of these establishments was 63,233. Twenty years later it stood at 51,912 and five years later at 44,142. This shows a net decrease from 1900 to 1905 of 15 per cent., and a total decrease from 1880 of 35.3 per cent. In 1880 the capital invested in these twenty-seven indus- tries was $1,276,600,000. In 1900 it had risen to $3,324,- 500,000 and in 1905 to $4,628,800,000, an increase from 1880 to 1905 of 262.6 per cent. The number of wage workers in these industries in 1880 was 1,080,200. In 1900 it was 1,611,000 and in 1905, 1,731,- 500. This shows an increase from 1880 to 1905 of but 60.2 per cent. A second table takes forty-seven industries all of which show a decrease in the number of establishments and a large increase of capital from 1900 to 1905. These forty-seven in- dustries comprised 29,800 establishments in 1900; five years later the number had sunk to 26,182. In 1900 the amount of capital invested in these industries was $1,005,400,000, and in 1905 it had increased to $1,339,500,000. In the same five 326 Socialism Inevitable years the number of wage workers in these industries had only- increased from 618,000 to 749,400. In connection with the above figures the following, showing the utter insignificance of the small producer in the total of manufacturing industries, is well worth noting. The figures refer to 1905. TABLE OF MANUFACTURING ESTABLISHMENTS. CAPITALS Less than $5,000 $5,000 to $20,000 $20,000 to $100,000 $100,000 to $1,000,000 . Over $1,000,000 Num- Per ber cent. 32.9 71,162 72,806 33.7 48,144 22.2 22,281 10. 1,882 0.9 TOTAL CAPITAL Per cent. 1.8 4.2 13. 43.8 37.7 Number wageworkere $165,300,000 531,100,000 1,655,800,000 5,551,700,000 4,782,300,000 106,300 419,600 1,027,700 2,537,550 1,379,150 Per cent. 1.9 7.7 18.8 46.4 25.2 It will be seen that the two latter classes combined aggre- gate 24,163 establishments, or only 11.2 of the total number. But they have $10,333,000,000, or 81.5 of the total manufac- turing capital, and employ 71.6 per cent, of the total number of wage workers in manufacturing industries. It may be added, also, that they turn out 79.3 of the total product. But the volume of production is constantly rising, owing to the development of modern machinery. As has been shown, there are but two outlets : one channel carrying off the product destined to be consumed by the workers, the other, carrying all that remains to the rich. The workers' channel, however, lies between the rock-bound banks of the competitive wage system, for wages are based upon the cost of living, not upon the efficiency of labor. Thus the miner in the rich mine gets the same wages as his comrade in the adjoining poor mine, and the owner, not the laborer, reaps the advantage. We have also seen that the channel which conveys the goods destined to supply the rich is subdivided into two streams, one of which empties into a sea of luxuries, while the other is simply an overflow, carrying off their savings. The former may broaden somewhat in time, but owing to the small num- ber whose wealth permits them to indulge in extravagant whims, can never be greatly enlarged. In any case, the pro- portion is so small compared to the channel for investment Significance of the Trust 327 that it affords little hope for relief from the rising flood. In other words, the rich will never be so ingenious as to spend enough to prevent overproduction. The great overflow channel, which hitherto has been con- tinually widening and deepening so as to accommodate the savings of the rich, is now suddenly found to be incapable of further enlargement, and even in danger of being dammed up. And why not? Man's wants, speaking materially, are limited. If one bridge is sufficient to carry me from New York to Brooklyn, a second would be a surplus. When one car line is built on a street, there is no room or necessity for more. It is almost superfluous to point out that with wages deter- mined by competition, a workingman can gratify few, if any, of his spiritual wants. Indeed, he is lucky to get the material necessities of life, and is not so foolish as to refuse a wage because it does not afford luxuries, while another, behind him, is only too willing and anxious to step into his place. Let us, for a moment, take a broad view of the United States from the standpoint of the man with a million dollars or more, who seeks a safe investment. Would he care to build another trans-continental railway? I think not: there are too many already. Would he care to go into wheat growing? Not unless he is in need of a guardian. For one year that wheat pays, there are apt to be three of drought or overproduction; and since it is impossible to get the farmers to combine to uphold prices, the latter situation is, at present, without remedy. Could he find one single industry that would warrant the investment of a large capital, that is, an industry not palpably overdone? As for smaller industries, there is a consensus of opinion in the business world that there are practically none promising good returns. They simply manage to exist, like the mice in a granary, escaping destruction by reason of their insignificance. The channel which carries the surplus wealth for the up- building of new industries, might be said to subdivide itself into a many branched delta, each mouth of which furnishes the supply for a particular branch of trade. Before the oversupply of capital, the various capitalists exerted every effort to widen and deepen their respective channels; but when they had finally procured all the capital they wished, 328 Socialism Inevitable they formed their Trust, and the process was reversed. It was as if they had thrown a dam across the entrance to their branch, and turned the water back into the main stream to be distributed through the other mouths of the delta, that is, into the other industries. With this metaphor before one, it is easy to see that as the process advances, and the successive mouths are closed by successive trusts, so much the greater becomes the supply for the other mouths, and so much the more imperative the need of the remaining capitalists to erect protective dams. For as in a real river, so with our industrial stream, when a sufficient number of mouths are dammed up, the water can no longer find an adequate outlet, and has a strong tendency to over- flow the dams, which will require constant strengthening if they are to remain secure. Each new Trust, in short, is a menace to the security of all previous Trusts. Finally the Trusts must collapse of their own weight. Rockefeller, with his enormous income, as we have seen, cannot find room for his investments in his own confessedly overdone oil business. He is the Alexander the Great of mod- ern industry, sighing for more worlds to conquer. He controls the largest banks, and has already taken possession of the electric light and gas plants of New York City ; he is in con- trol of the iron industry; he owns the Lake Superior mines and the lake transportation service, and will soon be in com- plete control of the copper mines of the United States as well as of our entire railway system. When Rockefeller gains control of an industry, the temptation for outside capital to compete with him is, to say the least, not overpowering. The proofs that Trusts are necessarily a protection against the rising flood of capital are simply overwhelming, both in theory and in fact, and it is clearly apparent that every in- dustry in this country must, in time, fall into their power. But the question is not merely a national one. The Trust with its enormous surplus not only gives our capitalists better facilities for competition with foreigners in foreign neutral markets, but by damming up the old and natural domestic channels for investment, is actually forcing them to invest in foreign countries. The present immense flood of surplus capital in the United States is seen in the Treasury balance, which shows the great- Significance of the Trust 329 est stock of gold on hand ever known in our history. The banks are overladen with money, and American investors are entering into the world's markets as buyers of foreign bonds. Chauncey Depew says that we are annually producing two thousand million dollars worth of goods more than the home market can absorb, and that we must extend our foreign markets if we wish to avoid a great unemployed problem. That American capitalists fully realize this is shown by their aggressive entry into foreign manufacturing fields. The late President McKinley, only a month or so before death, made a speech, declaring that foreign markets must be won by reciprocity treaties, and that this was absolutely essential to our further industrial progress. President Koose- velt also declares that we must have an outlet for our products abroad, since the domestic market no longer suffices. All of which is exactly in line with my argument, as to premises, though I disagree regarding the remedy. Foreign trade can never solve the problem of overproduc- tion. In the first place, most of the goods that the foreigner has hitherto given us in return for our domestic productions can now be made both cheaper and better at home than abroad; therefore we do not now derive the same advantage from the exchange that we formerly did. There was a day when we traded our wheat for English steel rail, but we can now make steel rail cheaper than England. Hence, though we still have our wheat to sell, we no longer find it profitable to take steel rail in exchange. As will be seen from the fol- lowing extract from a circular issued by the Silk Association of America, the United States is no longer dependent upon France or any other country for its silk goods, and hence another important item of foreign exchange is about to lose its power as a purchasing agent of our products : "The great equipment of the silk mills in machinery now, say 36,000 broad looms and 7,000 ribbon looms and all run by power, is evidence sufficient that the domestic silk manu- factures are fully up to the demand of the consuming markets of the United States." In short, the foreign goods that can he profitably imported into our country are becoming narrowed down to agricultural products from the tropics, and it is evident that these cannot possibly offset our balance of exports. Last year we exported 330 Socialism Inevitable six hundred million dollars worth of commodities in excess of our importations, and after allowing for the money spent by American tourists abroad, remittances for interest on foreign loans and the freights paid foreigners on ocean trans- portation, there is still, apparently, a heavy balance in our favor. Now the foreigner may go into debt for our goods for a certain period, but that cannot, on the face of things, be a permanent method of trading. Either there must be a settlement some day or trading will be stopped by the debtor going bankrupt. In this instance, it is Europe that is going bankrupt, and when she is forced to confess that she cannot pay America, then America, with the bankruptcy of her heaviest customer, will not be far from bankruptcy herself. We will not take goods from Europe to settle our trade balance, and she cannot give us gold. How then can foreign trade solve our problem of overproduction when we cannot trade ? Let us suppose for a moment, however, that our manufac- turer, burdened with his surplus of American goods, should, as a last resort, exchange them for, say, French goods. He has now on the docks in New York two billion dollars worth of French goods instead of two billion dollars worth of American goods. Will anyone tell me how he has bettered himself, and how he is going to get rid of these French goods ? Americans either will not or cannot buy them. The rich, because they already have all the French goods they want ; the poor, because their wages do not permit them. Foreign trade, clearly, is a most ephemeral solution for the problem of over- production. American capitalists to-day are more in need of foreign fields for investment than are European capitalists. Within the past few years the international money market has reversed itself, and America is now the creditor instead of the debtor nation. The trusts, as I have endeavored to show, are merely a dam built to prevent the swamping of our industries by the rising flood of surplus capital, just as the tariff is a dam to prevent them from being swamped by foreign capital. But the trusts do not prevent the rising of the flood. It would be impossible to close up all the mouths of the Missis- sippi no matter how high the dams might be built, for a flowing river must eventually reach the sea, if not by one Significance of the Trust 331 channel, then by another. And the trusts, in like manner, will prove but a temporary breastwork for our captains of industry. The Trust, on the other hand, is not only a protection against undue competition, but is a labor-saving device of the highest possible efficacy. It substitutes for the unscien- tific methods of competition, a sane and perfect system. Being the only producer in the field it produces exactly what the market needs. There is no more danger of either an over- supply or a shortage of Standard Oil in any city, than there is of water, gas, or postage stamps, and like these com- modities, its distribution is effected without the services of canvassers or the wasteful methods of advertising. This increased industrial efficiency of the Trust, together with its prevention of waste of capital in unnecessary duplication of machinery, hastens by so much the completion of the world's industrial outfit. It will not be long before capital will seek in vain for profitable investment. Interest, which is deter- mined by the amount of gain received by the last amount borrowed, will fall to zero, and money will remain unlent in the banker's hands. One great incentive, that of interest on deposits, for the poor man to put his money in a savings bank will cease. The workers now engaged in producing new machinery of production will be thrown into the ranks of the unemployed army by thousands. The Trust will be as powerless to meet this phase of our industrial collapse as was the armored knight of old to meet hunger and thirst. Political autocracy is possible, but industrial autocracy, no matter how benevolent, is economically impossible. At present, the Trust is an invaluable and absolutely necessary weapon of defence for the capitalist in our industrial war- fare, but when the enemy to be fought is no longer competing capital, but a complete cessation of demand for the goods produced, its value will have passed. On board ship, in mid-ocean, if I control the water supply I can demand what I like for this indispensable necessity; but when I have at last gathered everything into my posses- sion, my monopoly becomes valueless, since there is nothing left to acquire. If I am wise, I will then peaceably give up control of the water to the crew, and may consider myself in great luck if they do not get the fever of co-operation, and 332 Socialism Inevitable come back after me for the good things they yielded me while my monopoly existed. It is thus in the United States. The monopolists have unwittingly run both themselves and the workers into an industrial cul-de-sac. The capitalists may possibly see the danger first, and make a turn that will give them a short and precarious lease of life in their present position. An eight- hour law, a minimum wage, old age pensions, and such re- forms, might possibly extend the capitalist system. The best thing of all, however, to bolster up the old regime would be a rattling good war between the great powers. If the principal industrial plants, railway shops, bridges, etc., of this country were destroyed, the rebuilding would give unlimited employment to labor and great scope to capital for the investment of savings. Witness the booms which followed our Civil War, the Spanish-American War, the British-Boer War, and finally the war between Japan and Russia. Wars, however, cannot last forever. Sooner or later the capitalists will be forced to face the insoluble problem of finding work for men when there is absolutely no work to be found. It is absurd to hire men to build oil refineries when half of those already built are standing idle, and the work- man cannot blame the capitalist for refusing to employ him at a loss. But his stomach may be a better reasoner than his brain in this emergency. It will demand food. He will say, "Here is plenty of machinery to produce food, now why is it I can't get any? You say, Mr. Capitalist, that you can't hire me at a profit. That may be so, but why can't I run the machinery myself and take the product to feed my family ? You say you can't run it at present except at a loss. If so, then you will lose nothing by letting me have it. Anyway, I don't care what you wish, I know I am starving. You admit you can't give me food. Now I know, and you know, that my labor will produce enough to feed me if only I have your machinery. I propose to take it and use it for that purpose. I am going to elect the Socialist Party. I can do it, for I can cast a bigger vote than you can ! You say, the trouble is that I produce too much. If that be true, then so much the less fear of my starving when I produce for myself" Significance op the Trust 333 To this the capitalist may reply : "Why, John, you can't run a flour mill all alone; it takes a thousand men. You cannot transport that flour on a railway by yourself, that requires another thousand men to run it. You need associated labor. Even if you do elect your Socialist candidates you will be forced to run the country just as it is run to-day." "Oh, no/' John will retort, "We will run the flour mill and railways co-operatively by a public corporation, and we have that corporation already formed. It is the United States Government. We will all be shareholders and we will pay the workmen upon the basis of what they produce and not by a competitive wage determined by how little they can live upon. We won't have any overproduction to scare us then. When we nationalize all industry that bogey man of over- production will die a natural death." Free trade is sometimes suggested as a remedy for monopoly by those who do not recognize that the Trust is a natural evolution of industry. When a trust in a protected industry is formed to prevent destruction of that industry by domestic competition, and then, having complete control of the domestic market, it raises prices abnormally, the public are inclined to demand a reduction in the tariff so as to allow domestic consumers the benefits of foreign competition. Even if this were done, however, it would accomplish little good, for it would mean either that the foreigner will destroy the Trust by his ability to sell at a lower cost, or that the Trust will destroy foreign competition by lowering its price. And even the most rabid "Trust Buster" would hardly be willing to ruin the whole industry to carry out his er^ds. Most of the trusts in this country, however, are abundantly able to take care of themselves, not only in the domestic market, but, as the export returns show, throughout the world, so that the tariff to-day is of no use to the Trust ex- cept as a means of allowing it to charge higher prices to Americans than to the foreigner. Free trade would certainly abolish this unjust absurdity, but it would fail to accomplish the end in view, viz., the destruction of the Trust. Indeed the very fact that foreign competition had to be met would be an additional reason for the Trusf s existence, since the concentration of capital would make it that much the better fighting machine. Nevertheless, the protective tariff, so far 334 Socialism Inevitable as it goes, is a supporter of the present industrial system, inasmuch as it prevents labor and capital operating at the point of greatest advantage, and gives better employment to labor exactly as inferior machinery requires more men to operate it. Some have suggested that equality in freight rates obtained by the government ownership of railroads would destroy the trusts. The slightest investigation, however, would show that many trusts do not in the least depend upon favors from either railroads or government. The taking over of the railroads by the government would, of course, have far- reaching and revolutionary results, but the immense labor- saving that would occur from a centralized management would but serve to accentuate the unemployed problem. And this would be the least of its effects. The capital invested in railroads is half of the industrial capital of the United States. A transfer of ownership to the State would mean the payment to the present railway owners of an enormous sum of money that would naturally seek investment in other industries. These industries, owing to the plethora of capital, are already at the point of crystallizing into monopolies, and the advent of such an unprecedented flood of money would not only complete the process, but would cause the amalgamation of all the trusts into one huge organization, the coming Trust of Trusts. Nationalization of the railways, in short, would be letting free such a flood of capital that the ship of state would be immediately floated into the calm sea of Socialism. During the last twelve months, nearly $50,000,000 has been paid in dividends by the Standard Oil Trust. It may be noted that the investing public pay no attention to the intrinsic value of a stock, i. e., to what the property owned by a cor- poration cost. Nor is the "face" value of stock of any moment. A share of stock may be nominally worth $100, as is Stand- ard Oil, but if it pays 50 per cent, dividends investors are willing to pay $500 for each $100 share. On the other hand, there are some corporation stocks where each $100 share actually represents that sum invested, yet, owing to various conditions do not yield 2 per cent, per annum; hence their market value may be less than fifty dollars a share. There Significance op the Trust 335 is no remedy to be found for the Trust in the mere prevention of stock watering. Neither would publicity of accounts avail. Everybody knows that the Standard Oil Trust is making profits of over fifty million dollars a year. Yet what good does the knowledge do the public? Admitting that oil sells at double what it should, what are you going to do about it ? Why has not Mr. Kockefeller as much right to the unearned increment derived from his monopoly of the oil business as has Mr. Astor to the unearned increment from his monopoly of land in New York City? Mr. Hearst is just now leading a great crusade in favor of the municipal ownership of public utilities. He declares that it will end the reign of the grafters and the bosses, and this may be true enough. Certainly nobody can deny that, speaking generally, municipal ownership is an excellent thing and a great step in the right direction; but the question I would put to Mr. Hearst is : "How will municipal ownership guarantee work to the unemployed? How will it increase the worker's share of the general product ?" If I am hungry and take one step or even ten steps toward the restaurant, no one would think of saying that the distance so covered would lessen my hunger. Municipal ownership is only a step a means to an end, the end being the establishment of the complete co-operative system. Look at Glasgow, the city which Mr. Hearst points out to us as having so benefitted from municipal ownership, and as being free from graft ; yet Glasgow has even more poverty than New York. Of course I will readily admit that it would probably have still more poverty and, undoubtedly, a higher death rate, if it did not have public ownership, yet I say that this admission merely grants that public ownership is a good reform. It is good so far as it goes, but quite inadequate to abolish poverty. Let us by all means have municipal ownership, like any other good reform ; but do not let us forget that the thing to be abolished is the cause of poverty, namely the competitive system itself, and that until we abolish the cause of poverty we cannot expect to abolish poverty. In order to establish the co-operative system we must have not only the municipal ownership of municipal utilities, but the national ownership 336 Socialism Inevitable of national utilities. Let us have public ownership of all the means of production as a basis for our co-operative common- wealth, but let us not forget the fact that the end we seek is the abolition of poverty, not merely the getting rid of grafters and political bosses. If Mr. Hearst were to declare for public ownership because it is a means to the establishment of the entire co-operative system, and because he knows that nothing but that system can ever abolish poverty, his position would be much more logical than it is at present. No small and cramped ideal can nerve humanity for any great upward step. The Socialist sees in the co-operative commonwealth, as a result of the abolition of poverty, a future earth peopled by men who have become a race of gods, free, healthy, beautiful, happy. He sees a society where men love each other, love the world, love life, where men will love man and man will love men. Life will then be worth living because all that to-day makes it a hideous mockery will have disappeared. There will be no fear of starvation staring one in the face because one cannot get work. Everyone will then be his own employer. There will be no living in dark, noisome, unhealthful tene- ments; all will have beautiful, light, sanitary apartments. There will be no herding of people in cities as to-day, for there will be no landlord at hand to demand rent for each square foot of land, and there will be no private owner of street cars at hand to make profit each minute one hangs on the straps from workshop to house. Each worker will, if he wish, live in his own cottage in the green fields, miles from his work, for transportation will be so rapid, so pleasant and so cheap that he will have no reason to crowd into the tenements of a city. Besides his pay will be so much greater for under Socialism everyone will easily earn more in value than $5,000 a year to-day and his hours of labor so much less, that he can easily afford his own country home and have plenty of time to enjoy it. He will not feel that he must save his earnings to provide for accidents and old age, for there will be no more reason for saving under Socialism than for digging a well on the shore of Lake Su- perior. In short, there will be abundance for all when the people own the earth and are not under tribute to landlords and cap- Significance of the Trust 337 italists. The earth already produces sufficient wealth; the problem to be solved is not production, but distribution. Municipal and national ownership of all the means of pro- duction, democratically managed by the workers themselves, will solve the problem of distribution by substituting co-oper- ation for competition. To resume : We are confronted by a fact and not a theory. The Trust is here to stay. Democracy has been ousted from industry by autocracy, and as our political institutions are but a reflection of our industrial institutions, we should not pretend that anything but a sham democratic political state remains. The trade unionists pure and simple, the anti-imperialists, the would-be destroyers of trusts, are all right enough senti- mentally, but are too limited in their vision. This nation has the mightiest task before it that has ever been given to any nation to perform. The ship of state is already in the cataract of a great social Niagara. It is not too late to save her if we only have the patience and brains to cut our political Welland canal, and let her float gently into the Lake Ontario of Socialism. Delay is dangerous. That we shall finally reach our metaphorical lake Socialism is absolutely cer- tain; the only question is, shall we shoot Niagara or go through the canal? Now is the time, if ever, when this country needs earnest men who know the truth, and are not afraid to cry it from the housetops. Once let us get into the rapids and nothing can save us from the terrors of a violent revolution. Democ- racy must be established in industry and re-established in politics. There is really no first step to Nationalization of Industry; that time has passed. A half-way policy is indus- trially impossible, ethically unrighteous, and politically un- sound. The main plank, and in fact the only necessary plank in our political platform should be: "Let the Nation Own the Trusts, and let the workers have all they produce," Books on Socialism And Allied Subjects THE Wilshire Book Company has come to be known as "The Clearing House for Socialist Literature." All the standard works on Socialism, Single Tax, Anarchism, Anti- Socialism, Governments, Economics, The Family, etc., are not only listed but fully described in our New Book Catalogue which we will cheerfully send free on request. We also publish a comprehensive list of LIBERAL AND SCIENTIFIC BOOKS, which we will be pleased to mail also, on request. Do not fail to write for these catalogues They are well worth possessing, even if you know of no book you want just now. Just drop us a postal to-day. WILSHIRE BOOK COMPANY "THE CLEARING HOUSE FOR SOCIALIST LITERATURE" 200 WILLIAM STREET NEW YORK WILSHIRE LEAFLETS 1. Why Workingmen Should be Socialists. By Gaylord Wil shire. Price, 2c; 75c. per 100, postpaid. This is one of the classics of the literature on Socialism ir America. It was written over fifteen years ago, and has been printed b} many different publishing houses, and, so far as is known, the cir- culation to-day has been ten or eleven million copies. For simplicity and completeness it cannot be beaten. Ar excellent pamphlet to circulate in large quantities. 2. The Significance of the Trust. By Gaylord Wilshire. Price 5c; $2.00 per 100, postpaid. In, this pamphlet the author defines the trust question anc makes it plain that the inevitable outcome is Socialism. Writter in a simple, popular style. It is a most excellent pamphlet foi distribution. Give this pamphlet to the man who says Socialism won't work, and, after he has studied it, he will abandon all such arguments. 3. Wilshire-Seligman Debate. Price, 5c; $2.00 per 100, postpaid. This debate is a verbatim report of a memorable debate be- tween Gaylord Wilshire, Editor of "Wilshire's Magazine," and Professor Seligman, of Columbia College. It is very good reading for the man who wants to hear "both sides." 4. Hop Lee and the Pelican. By Gaylord Wilshire. Price, 2c. ; 75c. per 100, postpaid. This pamphlet is illustrated in an interesting manner. It is a fable illustrating how Hop Lee makes the pelican work for him. and has a very apt moral. 5. The Tramp. By Jack London. Price, 5c; $2.00 per 100, postpaid. This pamphlet is by the well-known novelist and author of "The Sea Wolf," "Call of the Wild," "War of the Classes," etc., etc. In it the development of the tramp is traced. The book has many valuable statistics and altogether is a terrible indictment of the capitalist system. 6. Wilshire-Carver Debate. Price, 5c; 100 copies, $2.00, postpaid. T. N. Carver, Professor of Political Economy, Harvard Uni- versity, vs. Gaylord Wilshire, Editor "Wilshire's Magazine." A debate on Socialism held January 15, 1906, at Hartford, Conn., before the "Get-Together Club," between Professor Thomas Nixon Carver, Professor of Political Economy, Harvard University, and Gaylord Wilshire, Editor of "Wilshire's Maga- zine." Professor Gustavus A. Kleene, Professor of Economics, Trin- ity College, presided as chairman. 7. Why Save Men's Souls? By Gaylord Wilshire. Price, 50c. per 100, postpaid. This is a reprint of a very good editorial that appeared in "Wilshire's Magazine." An excellent thing to give to those re- ligiously inclined. 8. A B C of Socialism. By H. P. Moyer. Price, 2c; $1.00 per 100, postpaid. A pamphlet that is good to distribute among people who wish a simple treatise on the subject. 9. Easy Lessons in Socialism. By Wm. H. Leffingwell. Price, 5c; $2.25 per 100, postpaid. In this booklet the essential principles of Socialism are stated in five simple lessons, each containing four propositions. It is specially adapted to put in the hands of those who have never yet done any reading on the subject of Socialism. 10. Socialism a Religion. A new pamphlet by Gaylord Wilshire. 2c. each; $1.00 per 100; $7.50 per 1,000. REAL RELIGION is something which finds a man, rather than something which he finds. Mr. Wilshire and most good r. .... s / Socialists agree that until the belief in Socialism gets hold of the f hearts and emotions of the people, more as a religipn than as an understanding of economic events, there is not going to be a \ social revolution. >i - N^^'The best Socialist is one who cannot only sympathize with poverty and wish to alleviate it, but who has the-^ niagin ation to see the world of beauty which Socialism promises as the^gTrafto be realized. ^_ S~*' With poverty abolished from the earth, men will devote the*n- ( selves to living their spiritual lives, and Socialism is merely i\ \ j)ath ,.to this end. It is just the pamphlet to pass along to your "church-going friend." 11. My Master the Machine. By Roy O. Ackley. Reprint of an excellent propaganda article that appeared in Wilshire's Magazine, October, 1906. Price, 2c. per copy; $1.00 per 100; $7.50 per 1,000. 12. Socialism, The Hope of the World. By Eugene Wood, author of "Back Home," etc. Reprint of an article in Wilshire's Magazine, November, 1906. Price, 5c. a copy; $2.00 per 100. 13. The Haywood-Moyer Outrage. By Joseph Wanhope. $2.50 per 100, postpaid. A more important pamphlet concerning the labor movement has never been issued. It is a trenchant indictment of capitalism. It will "sell like hot cakes" at your meetings. Especially good for outdoor meetings. You should see that every union man in town gets one. It has gone through two editions. Now is the time to order. 14, That Blessed Word Regulation. By Charles Edward Russell, author of "The Greatest Trust of All," "The Uprising of the Many," etc. Price, 2c. ; 100 copies, $1.00. A fifteen-page pamphlet, in Russell's clear and straight-from- the-shoulder style, that is just the thing for the man who believes "something ought to be done," but is afraid to have the govern- ment take things in hand. 15. The World's Castaways. By John R. McMahon, author of "Toilers and Idlers." Price, 25c. per 100, $2.00 per 1,000. A very readable leaflet illustrated with cartoons that make it sure to be looked into. So clear that the dullest must see its point, and how it applies to our present industrial system. 16. An Appeal to Women. By Mrs. Gaylord Wilshire. Price, 2c, 50c. per 100, postpaid. This "appeal" should be placed in the hands of every mother in the land. It illustrates Socialism from the woman's point of view. Send for a copy at once, if you have not read it. 17. The Division of Wealth; a lecture. By Jos. Wanhope. Ten cents per copy. A large 24-page pamphlet, illustrated with thirty-one of the best Socialist cartoons and most impressive photographs ever pub- lished. Every man who is at all interested in politics, even if only to the extent of voting, should read it. 18. Markets and Misery. By Upton Sinclair, author of "The Jungle." Price, 5c. A little masterpiece in Sinclair's gripping, vivid style. The most unconcerned must read it through once the first page is turned, and having read it, will be forced to think. An ex- cellent propaganda leaflet, lengthy enough to leave a lasting impres- sion. 19. "A Tip for the Jobless Man." By Jos. Wanhope, assistant editor Wilshire's Magazine. Price, 30c. per 100, postpaid, $1.50 per 1,000, express collect. Illustrated with ten particularly apt cartoons, written by one of the most logical and forceful of Socialist writers, especially for the man who has been "laid off," and carrying an argument that he simply can't get away from. This is undoubtedly the best prop- aganda pamphlet for use to-day. Selling to Socialist Locals by the tens of thousands. A sample copy free, or better, order 100 postpaid for only 30c; $1.50 per 1,000; $13.50 per 10,000, plus expressage. Entire Set of these Leaflets Sent Postpaid for 25 Cents. WILSHIRE BOOK CO., NEW YORK. a THE IRON HEEL" JACK LONDON'S TREMENDOUS BOOK The Greatest Socialist Novel Ever Written THE IRON HEEL is not a Utopian dream-story, but a gripping drama of the overthrow of the capitalist oligarchy of the present time, a stirring tale of the days " when things were doing." It never loses touch with present condi- tions ; it has the intense interest of a drama of real life. London is an acknowledged genius. His writings cover a wide range in their subject matter, but all are master- pieces in their way. Every one of them reflects the fresh, strong, inspiring spirit and enthusiasm, the healthy fascination of this interesting writer. Wilshire's Special Edition, $1.20, Postpaid ORDER FROM WILSHIRE BOOK COMPANY Clearing House for all Socialist Literature 200 WILLIAM STREET, NEW YORK The Workingman's Own Novel Toilers and Idlers Beginning his story in Fifth Avenue, New York, in the homes of the "Idle Rich," the author takes the reader through a maze of astonishing experiences among the so-called "Upper 400." Rensen, the hero, a rich young man, tiring of a life of idleness, and sick of dissolute companions, disguises himself and goes to work in an iron foundry, which he afterwards discovers to be his own property. In the trust foundry, among the brawny, sooty-faced men, he learns social conditions, meets Unionists, Anarchists, Settlement Workers, Inmates of Orphan Homes, and others. He faces the problems of his relations to his employees complicated with a strike and riot. The wasteful life of the "Idlers," the secrets behind the polished portals of upper Fifth Avenus, the follies of a "Society Queen," the lights and shadows of a great city, the shameless "Tenderloin," the glittering "White Way," which are described in the opening chapters, form a vivid contrast to the heroic struggle for life among the Workers. "Toilers and Idlers" grew from the experiences and suffer- ing of a hundred thousand men and women. It represents the ideas of no one man, but is the essence of the ideas of a million men. It sprung from poverty, suffering and want. The blood of the Army of Labor is woven into the thread of its story. If you are a worker and respect and love your class, you need this book. It will enlighten and broaden and strengthen all who read its pages, ONE DOLLAR, POSTPAID WILSHIRE BOOK COMPANY "THE CLEARING HOUSE FOR SOCIALIST LITERATURE" 200 WILLIAM STREET NEW YORK Tne Pmkerton Labor Spy First Complete Exposure of the Pmkerton Detective Agency. A Book tnat Helped to Save tne Lives of Moyer, Haywood and Pettibone. Secret Letters and Documents of a Colossal Spy Bureau tnat Conspires to Murder. This book is written by the private Stenographer of James McParland, the man who said "Moyer, Haywood and Pettibone will never leave Idaho alive." It is the most important book for the Labor Movement ever written. A BRIEF SYNOPSIS OF THE CONTENTS OF "THE PINKERTON LABOR SPY." It is an authoritative history, a complete expose, for the first time, of the secret workings of PINKERTON'S NATIONAL DETECTIVE AGENCY, and the relations of the Agency to CAPITAL AND LABOR. It shows that the Agency is a colossal spy bureau. ALL THE STATEMENTS AND CHARGES made in this book are fully warranted, and are in every instance borne out by the facts. THE WORK OF A NUMBER OF PINKERTON DETECTIVES OR OPERATIVES is fully described, the name of the operative and one or more of his secret reports being given in every case where necessary. A GREAT LIGHT is shed on the Colorado Labor Troubles which have heretofore been shrouded in mystery. THE WORK OF THE AGENCY IN THE MOYER-HAYWOOD-PETTI- BONE CASE is discussed, AND THE CONCLUSION ARRIVED AT SHOWS VERY PLAINLY that while it is hardly possible that the officers of the Western Federation of Miners are implicated in the assassination of Ex- Governor Steunenberg of Idaho, it is much more than probable that the PINK- ERTON AGENCY IS GUILTY OF CONSPIRACY TO HANG THE UNION LEADERS. A FINANCIAL STATEMENT PROVES that if the PINKERTON DE- TECTIVE AGENCY DEPENDED for success upon LEGITIMATE DETEC- TIVE WORK, THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO OUT OF BUSINESS. "The Pinkerton Labor Spy" is the most extraordinary exposure of the ma- chinery of industrial tyranny that I have ever read in my life. It will do more than anything yet published to awaken the American people to the infamous crimes against labor which have been committed in Colorado. I appeal to the Labor movement to place a copy of this book in the hands of every workingman in America. UPTON SINCLAIR. PRICE, 25 CENTS, PAPER PUBLISHED BY WILSHIRE BOOK COMPANY Clearing House for all Socialist Literature 200 WILLIAM STREET NEW YORK, N. Y. WILSHIRES MAGAZINE A Socialist Monthly Publication, which justifies its existence by a paid, proved circulation of more than ^UU>UUU Copies Each Issue There isn t a place on earth, -where capitalism obtains and class lines have been formed, where you will not find ^^ILSHIRES. ^WILTSHIRE'S wants workers to get more readers. Every reader can be safely counted upon to become a convert to Socialism, and the convert, in time, becomes a missionary for the conversion of others, ^^ere after the majority! Are you with us in this fight for the eman- cipation or the race? WRITE TO-DAY FOR SAMPLES AND TERMS Publishing Office 200 William Street NEW YORK VERY SPECIAL Six Remarkable Offers in Socialist Literature ^J|* You will never again have such a chance, and if you ^J delay too long, you will lose this opportunity. Up to a few months ago these books were not to be had from the publishers, even in hundred-lots, at the Price we are now offering them, and We Prepay Postage. It's up to you, Comrades. If you want to have a good working Socialist library, snap up these offers while you can. Combination No. 1 ON THE EVE. By Dr. L. Kampf $ .25 SOUL OF MAN UNDER SOCIALISM. By Oscar Wilde 75 AN EYE FOR AN EYE. By Clarence Darrow 1.50 Total at Publishers' Price $2.50, FOR $1.00 POSTPAID. Combination No. 2 AN EYE FOR AN EYE. By Clarence Darrow $1.50 A COUNTRY WITHOUT STRIKES. By Henry D. Lloyd 1.00 PINKERTON LABOR SPY. (Cloth.) By Morris Friedman 75 Total at Publishers' Price $3.25, FOR $1.50 POSTPAID. Combination No. 3 SOUL OF MAN UNDER SOCIALISM. By Oscar Wilde $ .75 PINKERTON LABOR SPY. (Cloth.) By Morris Friedman 75 A COUNTRY WITHOUT STRIKES. By Henry D. Lloyd 1.00 AN EYE FOR AN EYE. By Clarence Darrow 1.50 Total at Publishers' Price $4.00, FOR $2.00 POSTPAID. Combination No. 4 SOCIALISM INEVITABLE. By Gaylord Wilshire. .$1.00 BOSSISM AND MONOPOLY. By T. C. Spelling... 1.50 A COUNTRY WITHOUT STRIKES. By Henry D. Lloyd 1.00 AN EYE FOR AN EYE. By Clarence Darrow 1.50 PINKERTON LABOR SPY. (Cloth.) By Morris Friedman 75 Total at Publishers' Price $5.75, FOR $3.00 POSTPAID. Combination No. 5 COMMUNISM IN CENTRAL EUROPE IN THE TIME OF THE REFORMATION. By Karl Kautsky $3.00 SOUL OF MAN UNDER SOCIALISM. By Oscar Wilde 75 BOSSISM AND MONOPOLY. By T. C. Spelling. . . 1.50 A COUNTRY WITHOUT STRIKES. By Henry D. Lloyd 1.00 AN EYE FOR AN EYE. By Clarence Darrow 1.50 Total at Publishers' Price $7.75, FOR $4.00 POSTPAID. Combination No. 6 THE STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE. By Walter Thomas Mills $2.50 THE STORY OF A LABOR AGITATOR. By Joseph R. Buchanan 1.50 BOSSISM AND MONOPOLY. By T. C. Spelling.. 1.50 A COUNTRY WITHOUT STRIKES. By Henry D. Lloyd 1.00 AN EYE FOR AN EYE. By Clarence Darrow 1.50 PINKERTON LABOR SPY. (Cloth.) By Morris Friedman 75 Total at Publishers' Price $8.75, FOR $5.00 POSTPAID. WILSHIRE BOOK COMPANY "CLEARING HOUSE FOR ALL SOCIALIST LITERATURE" 200 WILLIAM STREET NEW YORK CITY f RETURN CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT TO-^ 202 Main Library LOAN PERIOD 1 HOME USE 2 3 4 5 6 ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS ^....*^J RENEWALS AND RECHARGES MAY BE MADE 4 DAYS PRIOR TO DUEDA1* LOA-. KctUOOS ARE 1-MONTH. 3-MONTHS. ANO 1-YEAR. RENEWALS: CALL (415) 642-3405 & DUE AS STAMPED BELOW INTERUBRARYLOA* DEC 21 W UNN. OF CALIF., BEf IK. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELE' FORM NO. DD6, 60m, 1 /83 BERKELEY, CA 94720 @