The workingman's advocate., 1874-12-05
PAST AND FUTURE LApoR.

me MoRKINoMEN's ADVOCATE n Daner
puol'sbed IN this city, which profeaaes 81 ~
The ofilcial organ Of the worfingmen ~ ths
United States, is responsible for the follow.
ing stuff: ''"
All wealth u the product Of physical and
intellectual labor employed in nroduct;o,,
ana IN the distribution Of the prDducts az IN.
dnstry and enterprise, a. well As il the useful
callIngs and Professions
All books on political economy. even thoae
written by henry Carey Baird. saw that the
three factors IN the production of wealth are
natural agents, labor, and capital. The Ap-
voCATR rejects two Of these aud recognizes la
Dor alone Capital is the effect Of past labor
II enters INTO every effort Of present labor
No production Ia possible without it. Now
future labor Ia nc more sacred than past labor,
that Is, capital. Future labor will simply
produ e capital. Capital already created and
saved has as many rights as capital to be pro
duced hereafter Capital cannot reproduce
itself without the aid of labor. Labor cannot
be employed OF utilized except by the use
and the consumption Of the savings of past
labor. In all modern undertakings, capital
comes first. Ii 1t Is absent labor is palsled
Ii the editor Of the ADVOCATE Is sincere IN
his contemptuous rejection Of capital, he had
better try 10 produce paper without its aid
He would, of course 70 to work naked in
the open air, with no machinery, no type. no
paper ho food to support lrfe while he was
working, nothing, save labor. For building,
machinery, iood, clothes all the things that
must exist before he eau thus utilize his la
Dor, are capital. What would be do without
them
The above appeared in the Chicago Tn
b'oie Of the 25th ult. Ii would seem that
what is stuff : in the ADVOCATE, is phil
osophy in the Tribune. The editor says
that capital is the effect Of past labor,
and "future labor will simply produce
capital. We believe all sound philosophy
beaches that cause must precede effect
Now We submit, II the language Of the
Tribune quoted above Is anything more
! than a different mode of expressing the
same idea We have advanced in the proPo-
sltIon excepted to and called stuff by
the Tribune. to-wit that all wealth or
capital is the product nf labor Now We
inform the Tribune that We reject none Of
the factors that enter into the production
of capital. With res pect 10 natural agents,
We regard them AS gifts Of nature to man,
and not as the production Of either capital
/ or labor. All that either capital or labor,
or both jointly, can do Aith them, is To
utilize and ht them for the use OF man.
and ia this process labor naturally comes
first, but by artificial means this order has
been reversed and, as We believe, in most
cases greatly to the injury of present
labor
The tg leaves existed before our first
parents we're placed in the garden, but not
as capital, in the aoceptation Of that term
as now employed 1t required labor and
not capital on the part of the old folks to
pluck and manufacture them into gar-
ments. When this was done, they became
capital in the sense in which that term is
now used, and were capital to the extent
them, but not farther. For if there had
been other folks there in a state of nudity,
having an equal right to appropriate these
gifts of nature they would not have been
disposed to give Adam and Eve more than
a fair equivalent for the labor performed
in the manufacture Of their cotumes
HavIng natural right to procure the raH
material from the same source. they would
of course have manufactured thei dresses
h thar lah rathar than f. st1h
nit to extortion. But We recognize the
fact that this natural order has been
changed, and admit that future labor is
no more sacred than (the products of past
labor, that il, capital. and that capital
already created (by labor) and saved has
as many rights a. capital to he produced
hereafter.
Now, will the editor of the Tribune ad-
MT that present and future labor is as sa-
cred and has as many rights as the pro
ducts Of past labor or capital If he will,
then We are agreed upon this, which Is the
real point Of dispute between the capital
lists and lahOrers s-between those who pro-
duce and distribute the wealth or capital.
and those who acquire it without labor Or
without rendering to society an equivalent
for 1t, by means Of cunning fiscal contri-
yances, monopolies and other unjust legis-
latIon.
The ADVOCATE never claimed any special
sanctity or superior rights for present or
future labor, over that of capital or the
savings Of past labor. All it contends for
Is, that these savings shall not he allowed
the power to consume and take away from
present labor an undue and unfair proper
tIou Of its products.
We will add that in the past the Tribune
has been regarded as the special organ Of
the capitalists that it has claimed for
capital. rights superior 10 and destructive
Of the rights and interests of present labor
If, however, its policy in this respect is to
be changed IN the future.-if hereafter it
is to advocate the equality Of the rights Of
present labor with those Of capital, we
cordially welcome it into the ranks Of
those who have in the past, and who will |
continue tn advocate this righteous doct- !
rine
A CHRISTIAN ~ SCoUNDREL
No ,siin th. f,,Ilouin,, from, L.. T..