New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1844-02-24
BY GREELEY & McELRATH.
VOL. EEE. NO. 27a.


| Does not this show the moral and religious absur.
dlty OF the art of the protesting Christian, who
while ostenslbly devotee Of the meek and low
ly and benevolent Jesus, thus calls in the law Of
avarice as his rule of life What night has the
Christian professor to point to the conduct Of a
sordld wording, in justification of his own
The commands of Christ and the benefcent
principles Of the Gospel should be his rule Ii he
can exhibit no parallel line of conduct to Justify
himself, other than the course of the wording
who grnds the face of the poor to enrich himself,
what right has he to the name of Christian,
which his conduct disgraces How much near
er is he to being Christian and how much more
worthy the name, than the young man who refu-
sed to sell all that he had and to give it to the
poor? No matter about the market price for wa
ges-the man who employs another for the small
wages of the present day-the woman who en-
| ploys the female at twenty five cents-both know
that such wages are too low for comfortable
| livelihood-both know it is not :'doing as they
would be done by And when they speak fthe
needy condition of the industrious poor, or put
forth feeble effort for their relief, it is direct
though silent acknowledgment that they have
been guilty of wrong, and that they know it
For were the industrious poor adequately paid for
their labor, they would not be the subjects Of
commlseration and charity. And yet, the Chris-
tlan's excuse is, 81 pay as much as other people
pay y i. e., am as Just and benevolent as my
ungodly neighbor is.
Suppose the next movement in obedience to the
demand of avarice (and it might legltimatey be
the next were to make it genteel, respectable
and lawful for men and women to steal every val
liable that came in thelrway. And suppose. too,
the Christian professor should give in to the
tom, and, being rebuked should reply, 81 steal
no more than other people do;" the rule is as
good in one case as in the other. There is no
doctrine or principle laid down in the Gospel
more clear and forclbe, nor more strongly insist
ed on than a course of righteous and benevolent
dealing with, and benevolent treatment of the
poor; and there is no one SO frequently and out
rageously violated. AND the Christian apology
is C. | do as well as other men," He should do
better, or drop the name of Christian. Though
there were but one Christian man in the world,
and he surrounded by millions Of unbellevlng OPP
pressors, it would be his duty, instead Of comply
! ing with their customs, to stand out by HIMSELF
and square his own life and conduct, and deal
with his own poor workmen according to the
| Christian rule for why should he claim to be
christian in the midst Of infidels, unless he dstln-
| guish himself from them by obedience to Christian
rules. And now let him, let any one, go to the
Bible and see if ne can find rule there to just-
| fy him in obtaining the labors of the poor at a
price below their value, because others do the
same tell you the Christian community, by a
departure from the spirit of the Gospel, and the
devotion they pay to pride and avarice, at the
very bottom of all the evils complained of, and
might reform them if they loved money less and
God and his creatures more. And until they set
better examples by their practice in these res
pects all their ten thousand projects to reform and
evangeize the community, will be as Intellectual
as an attempt to bale the ocean dry with gill
cup But have no hope of change for the bet
ter in that quarter. The Church has become 4
proud aristocracy, and, withal, about as corrupt
as political parties. Money making and proselyt-
ing are the orders of the day. 'Ephraim is join
ed to mis- idols-let him alone"
1t will be seen that the author does not deal in
individual censure, because he condemns every
thing in the lump-the Rich, the Church, Poll
tics. Sc He assumes that these are all at work
to deprcss the Poor whereas his proof goes only
to the extent that they do not befriend and upltt
the unfortunate, as they ought. He does not
seem to realize the magnitude and completely of
the mschicis he deplores, but inculcates the idea
that capitalist or employer might at once Danish
all Social evils, at least from his own immediate
circle, by simply resolving to be generously just
to those in effect dependent on his favor. But let
us test his assumptions. Here is young man,
reputed rich, who has Just fallen heir to a Cotton
Mill, for instance, nomnally worth $l00,000 and
encountered to the extent of $4,000. By run
{. l. }bo trla RI
his position, pay all outgoes and discharge his
debt. Well: he begins by resolving to pay liberal
and generous wages to all who work for hlm-a
dollar and half day to men, a dollar to women,
and fifty cents to children for he says people
cannot live as they ought on less He will have
none work more than ten hours day, for he says
that is enough, and working people should have
not enly the means OF, but leisure for Intellectual
and Moral culture. So far good. But he must
sell his Cloth to keep all this going; and he soon
finds that the same fabric which others sell for
ten cents per yard has cost him eleven in naked
outlay. What shall he do Who will buy his
cloth, enihousand yards week, at eleven cents
a YARD, when they can get abundance OF equally
good for ten? Must he not inevitably be broken
down, even if as rich as Cresus?
We urge not this to apologize for those who
press down wages to the lowest point and strive
to enrich themselves by grinding the face of the
Poor. Many they are, and fearful accounta-
biltv is theirs-let them meet it as they may.
There are millions now living in luxury on the
plumber of the Poor by what passes for shrewd
management and honest dealing In the eye OF
Justice, they are no better than those who grow