New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1851-12-11
kOssuth and Socialism.

The fact that we have been cited as claim
ing Kossuth for the Socialist ranks oblges us TO deal
sool q than had intended with his disclaimer OF
Socialism We see by our contemporary, The En-
aRiafr that we were represented as making that
claim by some gentleman who spoke az llucdersheld.
Now Kossu,h's disclaimer was the hrst form IN winch
Ne ascertalned his opinions on the subject at all
We saw In nothing but the endeavor OF politician
no is sometimes overwhelmed TO shape himself 10
che humor OF his company, and we auacned no gfeat
importance TO IT, because the general extension OF
lbt fiY which his labOTs so rapidly promoting,
would be more favorable to popular trulh than an
obter diotum uttered without reason, and with some
indication that he did not understand the SUBJECT
Such we believe 10 be the fact. We incline TO
imagine from the terms in which he has spoken &C.
casonallv, that kossuth has crammed" on the sub
iect, by scamperlng through some OF the Ffench
Writers on Socialism The readiness with which he
catches up one or two OF the blunderlng common
places leveled at the doctrine, proves how little he
has penetrated TO the substance oil H. lie SPEAKS OF
II as "tendlng to abolish some one oil the elements
Of social life aud to violate the sacred rites OF
human individuality y the Slavery which now op-
presses individuality beng the very evil which So
ciailsts desire to abolish One reason tor rs DIS
ca,mer is yery remarkable. Hungary he sys,
has nothing do" with that doctrine so debated IN
Manchester, ana so dislked by some OF the gentle
men who first got round the Hungarian On MS arm
val in this country. Hungary has nothing to do with
that doctrine "because she does not want IT, since
the majority other already in the possession
Of land, and the rest Will be so when he RECEIVERS
his Government In other words, Hungary neednot
NEEDLE with the doctrine, because the people OF
Hungary have or may have, the substance. Let he
substance be equally given TO the people Of England,
and they will as little trouble their heads about the
Coctrne.
lie objects to Socialism, because he says he can
not dehne its principle rs ne can define liberty. All
nations he saws can unite in the defense Of liberty,
which he can define, aud he does give capital de-
6nion. Liberty, he says is The faculty 20 do that
which YOU conserve TO yourself when you grant the
same faculty to all olhermen. But this dehnlton OF
liberty has not been current until 1t was mlnted
n the active brain of hosSuth and IN the appllca-
non Of liberty IN TIE systems for developing liberty,
republican constitutional, democratic, ohgarchlcal,
ne would find as many varieties as he has done N
the systems of Socialists The principle OF Social.
ism IS not less simple and distinct than that OF
liberty 1t NAV be thus stated, as We have often
stated it already. Adam Smith pointed out the
sYeat economy Of productive industry from what
ne called division of labor. Edward GibbOn Wake
6e,C has pointed out that, in order to such economical
division of employments, IL is necessary 10 have
combination OF labor To this revision OF the ougl-
nal statement " have added third term. In order
to obtain the full enconomy of productive industry
Il is necessary that laoor should be comolned IN
order 10 the division of employmentS, ana that inc
division OF employmenis should be devised ana
prosecuted IN concert That Is the principle OF So
commencement in the division of employments
principle already acted upon by numbers, who are as
surprised 10 hear that they are Socialists rs NJ Jour-
Gain was 10 hear that ne had been talking prose.
No~ kossuth's influence, gigantic as II IS, canno,
shake the force of th2t principle SOUND IN lse ana
daily better understood On the contrary the enor'
nous extension of popular liberty which must follow
his etierts viii contribute as the revolution OF lcic
cid 10 clear the field for the extension also OF mat
peace making, wealth-making idea London Leader