o a ^ . 
 
 » > > 
 
 o ^ 
 
 o o * 
 
 > J ' 
 
 •) >o 
 
 /» 
 
 s ^ 
 
 •5 ♦’ 
 
 D J ■*» 
 
 
 O' 
 
 ^■^%'• 0D*>» 
 
 Coin’’ of an Article hy > ,V 
 ■; ’.rt ;.v r, f-.l .',' 
 
 5 o I* 
 
 T. WHARTON COLLENS, 
 
 Of New Orleaxs. 
 
 Ix Labor Staxdard of Bostox, Mass. 
 
 For further exposition see ^^Edex of Labor*’ by the same Author. 
 
 Forty years ago, when the unemployed 
 workmen of Lyons marched through the 
 streets under a banner on which was in¬ 
 scribed the motto.... Vivre en travaillant 
 ou mourir en combatt(inf.^\ ... (Toiling to 
 live or fighting unto death), a thrill of in¬ 
 dignation and affright ran through the 
 nerves of the world. The world was as¬ 
 tonished at the announcement which the 
 inscription implied, that labor was a right. 
 That it was the poor man’s duty, every 
 votary of Plutus affirmed; but that the 
 duty implied the right, while also the duty 
 and the right implied that there should be 
 some form and method of carrying them 
 into effect, w’ere ideas few minds had con¬ 
 ceived. The world should have known, 
 that both Christianity and Philosophy 
 sanctioned the proletarian’s honest demand 
 for work and life. ^Tn the sweat of thy 
 face thou shalt live,” is the sentence God 
 pronounced on the man going out of Eden. 
 No one is exempted. Ceuturies'^ago, St. 
 Paul said, and after him every theologian 
 
 and moralist teaches, that he who will not 
 work should not eat It follows, that he 
 who will work haS'-a right to have work 
 and earn a living. Else death by starvation 
 would not be inflicted only on unwilling¬ 
 ness to labor, but might also be suffered 
 by willingness. There would be no dis¬ 
 tinct penalty inflicted on voluntary idle¬ 
 ness as the precept implies. It would be 
 a vain fulmination. The innocent and the 
 guilty would be condemned indiscrimin¬ 
 ately. Hence, the willing man, if indivi¬ 
 duals do not give him work at living 
 wages, may summon society to provide it. 
 He could not have been deprived of it but 
 by some error or offence imputable to so¬ 
 ciety itself. 
 
 But, it was the other branch of the 
 motto the world disliked the most; for, 
 instead of appealing to the ballot, it 
 threatened arms and battle to enforce the 
 right to labor and live. In this, under 
 the circumstances, the world was not 
 wrong; for the right of suffrage had been 
 secured and was enjoyed in France. 
 
 pZGZ‘^‘^ 
 
2 
 
 The (Tight to Labor and Live. 
 
 Where universal suffrage is established 
 by the constitution, a resort to arms to 
 force a political or social change, can only 
 be excused on the ground of extreme wron.ir 
 and immediate necessity 
 when every door 
 closed, force should 
 an almost unanimous coise»u aiij 
 probability of early success.* OA^nvisi* 
 civil war would arise. Thgiiy }:y’J?i,v-il <■ 
 
 the ruin and distress would ‘be‘•fnilffn; 
 greater than before j and, as it generally 
 happens, corruption and usurpation would 
 follow. 
 
 Not only is the right of earning a living 
 by labor recognized by religion and phil¬ 
 osophy ) but governments have always, 
 though reluctantly and stintedly acknow¬ 
 ledged it. Rome really did so when, un¬ 
 able to furnish work to her proletarians, 
 she satisfied their cry for bread and the 
 circus. England confessed it as the ground 
 of her jealous and hypocritical poor laws. 
 The assize of bread, in France, is one of 
 the modes in which the State gives effect 
 to this right. The price of broad is fixed 
 by law below the purchasing power of 
 workmen’s wages; and when the market 
 price of flour is so high that the baker 
 would lose by selling at that price, the 
 government indemnifies him: pays liim the 
 difference out of the public treasury. So, 
 almost every government, in some form 
 or other, concedes the right of tlie poor to 
 labor and live, and the obligation of so¬ 
 
 wotild be checked and defeatedj over-pro¬ 
 duction would be occasioned; and a ruin¬ 
 ous competition of overflowing markets 
 induced. From their point of view, this is 
 a correct statement of wliat 
 the effect on their interests, if 
 e labor always had full employ- 
 ,^»ont fcind reward. They know that if iu- 
 (Jc^oVapitly of them, the toilers could ])ro- 
 eiu-e the necessary soil, machinerv and 
 'ances, a consequent equitable state of 
 industry would follow, and the death blow 
 of exceptional riches would be struck. 
 Gain-gotten capital would cease to make 
 more gain; usury would find her occupa¬ 
 tion gone, and her treasures sunk to par; 
 and labor would have its own. Hence 
 when the inexorable master-appropriators 
 discharge their wagemen—refuse work and 
 wages to great numbers—drive men to be¬ 
 come tramps, vagrants and beggars, they, 
 at the same time, furiously and unceasing¬ 
 ly oppose and strive to thwart any at¬ 
 tempt government or society may make to 
 enable the unemploj’ed not only to work, 
 but to organize their work so as to pro¬ 
 duce all needed subsistence and comforts 
 without being dependent on the option or 
 interests of profit-seeking enterprisers. 
 
 In order to hinder the starving poor 
 whom they do not employ in tlieir shops, 
 factories and fields from doing productive 
 work, the stern and cynical masters put 
 on the mask of charily, and under pretence 
 of relieving distress, and giving effect to 
 
 ciety to insure them against any depriva- the right of living by labor, have founded 
 
 tion of this right. 
 
 The political economists and legislators 
 of England (copied by those of the United 
 States) imagine that if society, in good faith 
 and without opprcsdon, were to find work 
 for every man claiming it to earn a living, 
 the course of trade would be deranged; 
 investments of capital would be rendered 
 
 that so-called philanthropic but really in¬ 
 human institution known as the WORIC 
 HOUSE. From it thev, with, insidious de- 
 sign, banish not only every comfort and 
 adectuate subsistence, but also remuner¬ 
 ative and judicious work. Those who are 
 compelled to become its inmates are 
 treated as criminals. No distinction is 
 
 precarious and unprofitable; entor])rise allowed there between the able-bodied who 
 
The Tight to Labor avid Live. 
 
 3 
 
 Cc. 
 
 T> 
 
 are Avilling to work but cannot find em- 
 ])loym8nk and the able-bodied who be- 
 c.iuse thev will not work, have been com- 
 initted for vagrancy. The work the in¬ 
 mates are set to is always of a fruitless 
 nature. No wages are paid for it. The 
 food furnished is purposely insufficient aiuj. 
 repulsive. The living room is construct^J” 
 
 I’ ’ 
 
 on so narrow a scale as to be over crowded 
 when occupied Ijy tiie average luinibe^* pf,. 
 refugees and vagrants. Husband^ wife, 
 and child are not allowed to live togeth^iv 
 while in the establishment. In short, 
 every means, except direct and forcible 
 expulsion, are cunningly applied to drive 
 the refugees away. 
 
 Now, Social Economy, not Political 
 Economy, having regard to these facts, 
 and acting under the influence of God and 
 Neighbor-Love which makes her science, 
 proposes an honest compliance with the 
 demand of every toiler who asks to live by 
 his labor. She intends that productive 
 and remunerative work for every ahle- 
 bodied man sliall be provided; that there 
 shall be no competition between the toilers 
 to procure employment; that the oligarchs 
 of ?d aim non who now possess the power 
 of deciding who shall and who shall not 
 have work and wages, and what shall be 
 the kind and amount of that work, and 
 the rate of those wages, shall lose this 
 egregious mastery; that tlmre shall be no 
 ci't downs, no lockouts, no strikes, no 
 tramps, no under.production and under- 
 consum])tion, no long hours and short 
 wages; but ihat reasonable toil shall ob¬ 
 tain, universally, its just and abundant 
 reward. 
 
 ^tanv are the nu'asures which Social 
 
 V 
 
 Economy may Take to (airry out this in¬ 
 tention, but tlieri' is one of them to which 
 to-day I would diri'ct the reader’s sjiccial 
 attention. It is conceived for the ])urpose 
 (1 of procuring and securing biliov and 
 
 living for the presently unemployed; and 
 (2), of saving the toilers from the necessi¬ 
 ty of competing with each other for work 
 and wuages. Put into practice, it would 
 compel the master-enterprisers to pay full 
 wages; and, if they cannot afford adequate 
 eaTupel them to give up their busi- 
 mess^ wj^.hput in the least distressing the 
 Jaborers. they c»^ase to employ. 
 
 ; 'rj?q mighty instrument by which this 
 rp,sulti^cquld J^e effected, is the POLYTECH- 
 
 Before I describe it, I should mention 
 that though it might be instituted by pri¬ 
 vate associated effort, I propose that the 
 first one be organized and set to work by 
 society itself. 
 
 A Polytechnic Towmship is a voluntary 
 association of men of many and various 
 productive industries, to the end that all 
 might have sure wmrk and an abundant 
 living from that work. It has several 
 essential and distinctive characteristics. 
 
 1. The kind of industries the township 
 engages in, are only such as are proper 
 for the production of all things necessary 
 and commodious. It carries on no work 
 or trade in sumptuous, luxurious, or per¬ 
 nicious things. 
 
 2. It admits members from each trade 
 in such i}YO]) 0 )iion to the w^bole number of 
 all trades, that the production or service of 
 each trade will be adequate to the needs of 
 all the members needing that production 
 or service; no more, no less. 
 
 3. It regulates the labor of each trade, 
 so ihat each needed article is produced in 
 such quantity as the towmship should con¬ 
 sume, without leaving a surplus; except 
 wiien a surplus is necessary to procure 
 from OTitside those things wiiich, from 
 some insuperable reason, cannot be pro¬ 
 duced within the township itself, for its 
 own consunq)tion. 
 
 4. The ideal of the Poly technic Towit*' 
 
4 
 
 The Tight to Labor and Live. 
 
 ship is, that it shall, besides being self- 
 supplying be also self-sufficieni, as entirely 
 as surrounding conditions will permit and 
 .as ingenious industry can make it. 
 
 5,. The products are distributed among 
 the co-operatives according "tc'' fUe ,iahor-. 
 
 ^ • j* I ^ # 
 
 time of each; and they elfeot -^xcdTayiglsi* 
 
 on the principle of avefag^^ dabor-fime- 
 
 1 ^ i i «‘^ * 
 
 value. . ^ « cc, ; ;; / 
 
 ‘ • « 
 
 Hence to provide raw mat^:k?als aitul^ 
 FOOD it has members who ai’e! plqughinen'' 
 reapers, gardeners, dairymen, shepherds, 
 bee-tenders, orchardists, woodchoppers, 
 miners, butchers, bakers, cooks, etc; to 
 make clothing it has spinners, weavers, 
 washers, dyers, tanners, shoemakers, hat¬ 
 ters, tailors, milliners, seamtresses, etc; 
 for erecting habitants, and other build¬ 
 ings or receptacles, it has carpenters, 
 joiners, coopers, brickmakers, bricklayers, 
 stone cutters, masons, etc; for making its 
 own TOOLS and engines, it has blacksmiths, 
 locksmiths, cutlers, foundrymen, machin¬ 
 ists, copper and brass workers, tinners, 
 wheelwrights, mill wrights, cabinetmakers, 
 turners, etc; for EDUCATION it has school¬ 
 masters, lecturers, preachers, and other 
 teachers, printers, etc; and all these are 
 marshalled in carefully estimated economic 
 proportions, so that all of them are every 
 day productively occupied, and that the 
 -Operative of one trade or branch may take 
 part in the work of others, whenever ne~ 
 oessary or beneficial; and so that the time 
 and strength of no one is wasted in idle¬ 
 ness. 
 
 It is calculated that a township oc¬ 
 cupying an area six miles square (say, 
 23,000 acres) should have and could main¬ 
 tain about ten thousand inhabitants. With 
 this space and number, the proportional 
 grouping and labors of the members is 
 easy and advantagous. As to the land, it 
 is not absolutely necessary for it to be 
 all in one body. It may be cxpediant to 
 
 locate different industries in separate si¬ 
 tuations: a factory here, a field there, a 
 saw-mill elsev/here. The essentials are, 
 that the inhabitants be associated; that 
 the results of their industry be equitably 
 distributed under the common control: 
 Jhat-they have their reward according to 
 t,he^ average labor-time standard of ‘Tro- 
 :'ppCtipEalisin f and that no drones or spe- 
 ^cnlatofs'’ gouge profit or usuia' from their 
 .'pu’o'ductions. 
 
 But, exclaims the Political Economist, 
 if society were to furnish the means of 
 founding many such townships (say, one 
 in every district), and the laboring classes 
 were to avail themselves of it and succeed 
 in their enterprise, the effect would be to 
 deplete the labor market, save the laborers 
 from competing with each other for em¬ 
 ployment, and raise the price of wages. 
 
 Yes, tlie Social Economist replies, of 
 course that would be the result, and this 
 i^ precisely one of the effects it is intended 
 the establishment of Polytechnic Town¬ 
 ships shall have. 
 
 But, says Political Economy, a rise in 
 wages would be ruinous to our existing 
 textile, wood, and metal manufactories of 
 all kinds. They would make no profit on 
 their invested capital. They could not 
 compete with other countries in foreign 
 markets unless, by cheap labor at home, 
 they are enabled to offer cheap goods 
 abroad. They cannot secure a foreign 
 trade, unless they can underbid and under¬ 
 sell the world; and there is only one way 
 to do this: it is to reduce the cost of labor 
 lo\ver here than it is any where else, and 
 nothing but a continual glut of the labor 
 market will have this effect. 
 
 True, says Social Economy, but why 
 should we care for foreign trade, on such 
 terms, if labor (*an be self-supplying and 
 self sufficient at home? Let a few indi¬ 
 vidual enterprisers become insolvent, cease 
 
The Tight to Labor and Live. 
 
 5 
 
 to make profit on their capital, if they can 
 maintain themselves only by subjecting a 
 great multitude of toilers to harder and 
 harder work, and to poorer and poorer re¬ 
 ward. By their absurd cupidity and com¬ 
 petition they ruin themselves anyhow, un¬ 
 dersell one other, alternately overwork 
 and underwork in the most capricious 
 manner, speculate, embezzle, and go into 
 bankruptcy. Why should the people in 
 general want that this, that or the other 
 individual should have the opportunity to 
 become inordinately richer than others? 
 None should, and every one that tries to 
 become so deserves to be ruined. What 
 is desirable is, an economic order by 
 which the happy prosperity of the great¬ 
 est number would be secured, and not a 
 system of which the natural effect is to 
 evolve a few monstrous fortunes out of the 
 substance of the bodies and souls of their 
 God-made equals. Yes their equals, 
 not only physically and intellectually 
 under God in nature, but their superiors 
 morally and industrially before God in 
 society. I see no reason why I should be 
 sorry if the appropriators were reduced to 
 poverty; for then, whether for weal or for 
 woe, they would only participate in the 
 common destiny, from which they have no 
 just title to be exempted. 
 
 But, says Political Economy, if Po¬ 
 lytechnic Townships were numerous or 
 generally inaugurated, rent and profit 
 would cease, and as a consequence no one 
 would borrow money to carry on commer¬ 
 cial or industrial enterprises. 
 
 Precisely, answers Social Economy, this 
 is the effect they would have. 
 
 But then, argues Political Economy, if 
 ])rofit and rent, and as a consequence usury 
 also, were to cease, the masters would 
 (dose their factories and workshops, stop 
 their entei*prises and im])rovements of all 
 kinds, discontinue investments which de¬ 
 
 velop resources j and then the wagemen in 
 great hordes would be thrown out of em¬ 
 ployment: capitalists would refuse ad¬ 
 vances to productive labor of all kinds, 
 and hence production itself would be ar¬ 
 rested; famine, pestilence, destitution and 
 riot would be occasioned; society itself 
 would be dissolved; and moral chaos and 
 physical misery become universal. 
 
 No, replies the Social Economist, for 
 your argument presupposes the existence of 
 numerous Polytechnic Townships, as the 
 cause ot‘ the cessation of rent, profit and 
 usury. The evils you predict could not 
 take place if society were to establish as 
 many self-supporting and self-sufficient 
 townships as (by reason of the dog in a 
 manger policy of the masters) might be¬ 
 come necessary. In such townships, the 
 people would produce by themselves, and 
 distribute among themselves all things ne¬ 
 cessary. Indeed the master appropriators 
 would be glad to sell out their establish¬ 
 ment to newly formed associations of 
 toilers, or to society, for cash, for annui¬ 
 ties, or other reasonable indemnity; fand 
 eveiy manufactory so purchased would be 
 made a proportional element of a Poly¬ 
 technic Township. Peace and abundance 
 would prevail notwithstanding the finan¬ 
 cial catastrophe which would befall the 
 masters individually; and most of them 
 would gladly accept and enjoy the new 
 industrial order founded on Christian 
 justice. 
 
 But, savs the Political Economist, in- 
 sisting still on his views, this Polytechnic 
 'Pownship is to be composed of volun¬ 
 tary members: only those who enter it of 
 their own free will and accord. Hence, 
 those who are out of employment may 
 refuse to enter it, while those who are at 
 work and earning wages may quit their 
 employers to become associates. Is not 
 this contradictory? It is to furnish work 
 
6 
 
 The (higkt to Labor and Live, 
 
 to those who happen to be idle but are will¬ 
 ing to work, that the plan of founding 
 these Polytec-hnic Townships is proposed 
 to society. To be consistent with its 
 origin, this contrivance should be carried 
 into etfect by sending only idle persons 
 there, and setting them to work under 
 sentence of the law, whether they are 
 willing or not. 
 
 Nay, responds the Social Economist, 
 we repel any imitation whatever of the in¬ 
 famous British Workhouse. We refuse 
 to restrict libertv when it is not absolute- 
 Iv necessarv to do so. Whether those 
 who enter a Polytechnic Township come 
 out of the factories and workshops or from 
 among the unemployed it matters not, 
 provided they come in sufficient number to 
 relieve the labor-market and save the 
 toilers from competing with each other, 
 and so change the solicitation to the side 
 of the masters. If the employed leave 
 their masters to join the township, they 
 would therebv create vacancies in the fac- 
 tories and shops they leave, and the un¬ 
 employed who do not care to go to the 
 township would be engaged to till their 
 places. Either way, the effect must ])e 
 the same. The labor market would 1)0 
 equalized; and at the same time no one 
 would be coerced or op’pressed. 
 
 But, says the Political Ecoiioniist, the 
 tramps and other idlei-s may not avail 
 themselves of the o|)})ortui!ity, may prefer 
 doing nothing but roam over the country, 
 begging and stealing, so that tin* ihily- 
 t(*chiiic'J'ownship would injure the masters 
 of mines, farms, foundries, worksh()])s and 
 factories by enticing th(*ir industrious 
 operatives away, without diniinisliing ihe 
 number of the indolent and unoccni)ied. 
 
 This, re])lies the Social Economist, is not 
 a valid objection; for it assumes that V(e 
 luntary vagrancy would enjoy imiiiunity. 
 ()n the contrary, if men will beg or steal, 
 
 despite the suffering and danger of such con¬ 
 duct, rather than work, then the conse- 
 j quences declared by law and religion should 
 I be inexorably laid upon them. Mark you, 1 
 j suppose the case of available employment 
 I being evaded. I have no charity or com- 
 I passion for wilful idlers, and do not plead 
 ! their cause. Social Economv is their im- 
 placable enemy. They should be forced 
 to wmrk or starve. A 'workhouse is too 
 good for them. Hard labor in a peniten¬ 
 tiary is their due. Bemember, how^ever, I 
 sav this onlv for the time wdien a living 
 
 bv labor shall have been secured bv means 
 
 %/ 
 
 of the Polytechnic Township, recognized 
 and carried into effect by the laws. To 
 tell an able-bodied fellow, asking for'la- 
 bor to go to '^mrk, is now-a-days a heart¬ 
 less sarcasm. If, ho'^^ever, society itself 
 honestly proffers free and requited labor 
 to all, and yet some, though able to work, 
 persist in vagrancy, than society may just¬ 
 ly punish them. Society will have done 
 its duty in regard to them; and their at¬ 
 tempt to live as parasites upon the labor 
 of others would be inexcusable, and 
 I indeed, a crime. But to suppose that 
 ! there is a numerous class of such people is 
 I a mere fanev. The destitution of an idle 
 ! life is not so agreeable as to be preferred to 
 
 ^ a sufficient subsistance obtained bv honest 
 
 . •• 
 
 labor. (Generally men are tramps, beg¬ 
 
 gars and paupers, because they cannot 
 Ind]) it. Few, (and these are cheats), find 
 sufficient su])i)ort in such a life. 
 
 But, Political Economv doubtinglv asks, 
 where will society derive the funds which 
 would be re([uired to create these Poly¬ 
 technic 'J'ownships ? 
 
 I 
 
 From sew ral resources, Social Econ¬ 
 omy replies. A great part of the amount 
 necessarv for beginning is alreadv avail- 
 able. That ]iorti«‘u r f th.e Public Charity 
 Fund now used to relieve able bodied 
 paupers might be taken at once. Work- 
 
The (kight to Labor and Live. 
 
 1- 
 
 bouses, poor houses, soupliouses, night re¬ 
 fuges, and the like, would become useless, 
 and the large sums expended aunuall}^ to 
 support them without return, would pay 
 for building and furnishiug Polytechnic 
 Towuships. If this did not suffice, well 
 then, let the rest be raised by taxation. It 
 is from taxation that society has hereto- 
 fore drawn all the funds she has ever ap¬ 
 propriated to develop the general welfare. 
 From taxation, millions upon millions are 
 derived to subsidize rail-roads, and lines 
 of steamships, improve rivers and har¬ 
 bours, build school-houses, forts, and peni¬ 
 tentiaries, endow science or art and make 
 war. 
 
 Now, wherein do the merits of these sur¬ 
 pass the securing of free, productive and 
 remunerative labor to every one of the 
 people? Can there be a matter of greater 
 general interest than this? The first 
 Polytechnic Township may be made to 
 reimburse the expense of its own creation. 
 This it could do by easy instalments with¬ 
 out the burden of interest 5 and afterwards 
 it would be made to pay its proper propor¬ 
 tion of general taxes. The amount re¬ 
 imbursed by the first township should 
 be applied to building and furnishing a 
 new one like itself; this one should also 
 reimburse its own cost, which should be 
 used to erect a third, and so on without 
 limit. Thus the original advance made by 
 society would serve many times over and 
 over. 
 
 But, objects Political Economy, the 
 amount required in the beginning would be 
 enormous. 
 
 Well, rei)lies Social Economjq even 
 were it so, society must do its bouuden 
 duty, whatever may be the cost; but it is 
 false to pretend that the amount of the 
 necessary advances would be enormous. 
 Two millions of dollars would, including 
 the price of land, l)e enough to build and 
 
 furnish a township for a population of ten 
 thousand. Compare this with the unre- 
 productive expenses of a large army and 
 short war; or even with the cost of a single 
 iron clad ship, and decide which outlay 
 should be most cheerfully incurred. 
 
 But, says Political Economy, what 
 mighty means of fraud, corruption, em¬ 
 bezzlement and o])pression, would this 
 movement furnish to the State officers and 
 agents having charge of it. 
 
 Far be it from me, answers Social 
 Economy, to propose that the State should 
 be the sole founder, or that having founded 
 she should retain ownership and controL 
 She should make her advances under the 
 well defined right of inspection and verifi¬ 
 cation by committees of the original co- 
 operators : those who would subsequently 
 be obliged to reimburse the cost from their % 
 own hard work. The establishment, when 
 completed, would be delivered to them, and 
 they would be independent in its adminis^ 
 tration. The relation of the government 
 towards them would, as regards the pro¬ 
 perty, be only that of a creditor, with the 
 right to interfere by foreclosure in case of 
 a violation of the conditions of the trans¬ 
 fer, or failure to repay the original cost. I 
 am individualistic as far as possible in 
 every way not practically subversive of 
 the principle of the-Average-Labor-Time- 
 Standard-of-Exchangeable-Value. 
 
 But, says Political Economy, when you 
 say that society is bound to furnish labor 
 to those who cannot obtain it through 
 private enterprise, you add words implying 
 that private enterprise, shall bring or pay 
 to labor an adequate reward. Would yon 
 encourage strikers and insure their suc¬ 
 cess? Would you have society take sides 
 with strikers? Would you hold society 
 responsible for fluctuations in the rate of 
 wages? 
 
 Of course 1 would, answers Social 
 
s 
 
 61790876 
 
 The (kight to Labor 
 
 30112 
 
 afuaruvoe: ~ 
 
 Economy; for it is not merelj^ to secure 
 star^'ation wages that the Polytechnic 
 Township is devised; but in order that 
 manful labor shall have a manful reward, 
 —a reward fit for a human being,—a re¬ 
 ward suited to a moral and intellectual na¬ 
 ture, ratlnr than to that of a beast of 
 burden. It is to renew himself morally 
 and intellectually, as well as physically, 
 with the hope of progressing toward the 
 enjoyment of every thing his perfect nature 
 requires, that man has recourse to toil. ^Tt 
 is written: not on bread alone doth man 
 live, but every word that proceedeth from 
 the mouth of God.” To withold this 
 heaven-prescribed reward, is the same, in 
 effect, as to refuse the right to labor itself. 
 To say that the one did not imply the other 
 would be derisive. If a man's labor pro¬ 
 duces what is requisite for the nurture of 
 these three, body, intellect and morality, 
 he should enjoy that nurture; for it is the 
 sweat of his own brow. To deprive him 
 of any part of it is a grievous wrong, con¬ 
 demned bv the word of God; and societv, 
 by making private offers- of pitiful wages 
 the reason for refusing fully restorative 
 toil, would practically defeat the right to 
 labor and live. Away with such deceitful 
 pretexts. 
 
 But, persisting Political Economy re¬ 
 marks, evidently the projector’s idea of 
 providing employment and support for 
 those who are now unwillingly idle, is a 
 transitory or incidental pretext. Evidently 
 it is expected that the movement, so li¬ 
 mited and special at first, would, by 
 gradual extension, absorb all labor, all 
 commerce and trade, and develop an 
 economic order entirely new; in one word, 
 change the face of the world. 
 
 Certainly, replies Social Economy, I 
 said so at the outset. Such indeed, is the 
 main purpose of the plan, and such no 
 doubt would be the result, if it were 
 
 fairly carried out. It would be a six hour 
 movement; and, notwithstanding such a 
 shortening of the hours of labor, an anti- 
 usurv movement; for it would root out 
 profit and other causes of usury. It would 
 of its own force and effect put a stop to the 
 gouging of labor by enterprisers and com¬ 
 mercial speculators; and therefore capital, 
 yielding no selfcreative increase, would be 
 worth itself, dollar for dollar; ‘‘only that, 
 and nothing more.” It would leave the 
 people leisure, in the midst of plenty, to 
 gain knowledge, to satisfy religious con¬ 
 victions, and to gratify athletic, recreative 
 and esthetic tastes. It is the grandest 
 and most leasable plan of peaceful and 
 progressive revolution, in the interest of 
 the toilers, that can, under present cir¬ 
 cumstances, be divised. Oh ! how beau¬ 
 tiful would the world be, if this one thing 
 of securing labor and its fall reward to all 
 men, were once realized. The master en¬ 
 terprisers and appropriators fear it with a 
 livid fear, hate it with a crimson rage, 
 resist it by desperate efforts, and predict 
 that extraordinary evils would flow from 
 it. But Oh! it should be the ideal of the 
 toilerSj the polar star of their efforts, the 
 anchor of their hope. In their party plat¬ 
 forms, at the ballot box, and from the le¬ 
 gislature they should demand its establish¬ 
 ment. It is par-excellence the initial 
 scheme of their industrial salvation, and 
 the forecast of their moral, their religious, 
 and their intellectual elevation. It is 
 pregnant with all desired relief, full of the 
 seed of happiness. At the same time it 
 exacts only justice; for it only proposes to 
 society to fulfil at once the duty she owes 
 to all those who being unemployed, are 
 nevertheless willing to earn an honest 
 living by their labor. Come let us “go for 
 it” all together, in solid and unanimous 
 array. 
 
 V 
 
 T. Wearton Collexs.