Southport telegraph. [volume] (Southport, W.T. [i.e. Kenosha, Wis.]) 1840-1850, 1844-04-02
Fx,ract from work by B. F. Moore.
LABOR AND CAPITAL.

..It has not been my Intention 10 deal
in individual censure, but TO treat the evils
,onnlained of as evils Of social and con-
ventional character; as diseases in fact,
which are interviewer in the very frame
work Of society itself, and prey on Its mo-
raj system. Thousands whose intentions
are probably good, and who are in the
main actuated by good feelings, cannot
Withstand the temptations laid before them,
,houghtIessly yield TO the spirit which
prompts the associated body, become con
taminated with the vicious ProPensites OF
the times, and following the fashion OF the
day, violate their better feelings to keep
pace with their fellows. But, as every
whole is made up Of Integral parts, It has
become necessary 10 lndlyldualIz9 III some
measure, that the social evils should APP
pear to Us in their proper shape ana char
acter. In speaking TO one individual mem
Der Of the Class complained Of, respecting
the evils engendered by the oppression Of
the poor consequent on the stlnted com
pensation paid Tor labor, the justification is
ever at hand-'i pay as much as any one
else; and fair price for labor, ke that OF
every commodity, is what it will bring IN
market" According to the general laws
Of trade, this is true. But the general laws
of trade are the laws Of avarice. BY them,
every man is fully justified in getting all
he can, and keeping all he gets, let who
will suffer, provided he can do SO and keep
within the laws Limit, or evade lis penal
ties. But the question is, whehera moral
man, and especially Christian man, is
justified bv the principles by which he pro-
fcsses individually to be guided, in taking
advantage o. the necessities of q fellow crea-
ture, and to distress that fellow creature
because of his hesplessness, to enrich him
self? II SO, then the law of avarice, and
tie law of Christian moral ty are the same
thing. If not, the mo:al man and the
christian can never be justified in throwing
their proleSscd principles into common
stock with the multitude, and fashioning
their own conduct, in opposition to those
principles, after a conventional model, the
law of a BODY whose master-sprit is ava
rice, and whose god is self. Fashion, or
the general custom, can never justify "a
man for departure from the rule of right.
Andwhv arc they cou1!cnanccd and con
tnued! 1t is well known that ii the great
BODY of Christian profess RS, ins'cad OF
lending their aid to depress the working
classes, would combine &c increase their wa
q,s and elevate their character and stand
mo the work must be accomplished, for
their influence could not be wthslood. -
Bat Instead of dong tn $, they manifest
tho x,me eng ,rnes, for the accumulation
Of wealth as others do. and the same dc
sire 70 revcl in pomp and luxury, and they
pursuc precisely the same means toaccom-
nlish re object. Rcp, a, to one of them
fine sublime christian maxim, "As We would
tbot others should do On YOU. do YOU even
SO unto them:'' point TO the po,r man del.
wing for him at a rate that will scarcely
furnish the co,nmonest nrcessares Of life
while he. the Christian employer, is living
in allluencc on the traits Of the labors o
such, and accumulating his spare thous
and, per annum. His reply we have sect
u pay him as much as another MAJ
would" True; aud suPpore you make
the above remark 10 one of the ba'cst sons
.! wealth in the community, he mlgat re-
piy-'I ,purge no more out OF the poo
Iaborcr than the most exemplary Christian
does" Does not this show the moral and
religious absurdity of the art of the pro.
Tossing Christian, who, while ostorsibv a
dcvotee of the meek aud lowly and bcnevo.
lent Jesus, thus calls in the law OF avarice
as his rule Of life! What right has the
Christian professor to point to the condQc
of sordid wording, in Justification o
his own?
The commands Of Christ and the beneh
cent principles of tie Gospel should be hi
rule. II he can exhibit no parallel line o
conduct 10 justify himself, other than TIT
course of the wording who grinds the face
Of the poor TO enrich himself, what RICH
has he to the name of Christian, which hi
conduct disgraces! How much nearer /.
he to being a Christian, and how mucI
more worthy the name. than the voun4
man who refused TO sell all thai he had
and to give ii all to the moor? No matte,
aboutthe market price for wages-,he mar
who emolovs another for The small wage.
of IN. present dov-,he woman who en-
-. j. r, -. c. -.