The Labor enquirer., 1884-12-20

reason why the bible has been subjected
70 80 much criticism i that il hss been
nicely subdivlded into sections renarka-
blv convenient for quoting purposes
And I regard il as An indisputable proof
of the impattiality Of Providence that
such inestimable facilities for criticism
we're given to the numerous
shallow fools who depote their
lives to finding fault with the bible. But
l must keep to tho 4soclalis. Catschism, "
and it's connection with religious contro-
versiallsts is not very apparent.
At the opening We have society divided
into two classes, Employer and EN-
,ployed, Idlers and Workers, Privileged
and Plundered, or, moro simply still.
Rich and Poor" In the same chapter is
: statement Of how the rich enslave the
poor, and the reasons Why the poor have
SO long submitted to their tyrants. Here
are few passages which arc especially
worth quoting:
"What is the alternative to the present
unequal distribution Of work and good
things?
"That all should be obliged to do
their fair share of the work, and to con-
tent themselves with fair share of the
good things,
Are those who insist upon the prac-
tical enforcement Of this principle Com
serva1ives or Radicals?
They are neither, since they are
necessarily opposed to I'll political par
ties.
What, then, are they called
From the fact that they wish to dis
place the present system Of competition
for the bare means ofsubslstence, where
each man is for himself. and to establish
in its stead the principle of associated
work and common enjoyment, where
each is for all and all for each, they are
called Socialists"
The second chapter, on "The Capitalist
System" opens with statement which
is not quite correct:
What is wealth
Everything that supplies the wants Of
man, and ministers in any way to his
comfort or enjoyment
This definition of wealth is too ambig-
uous, to say the least. The author con-
tradicts and corrects himself in the next
verse:
"Whence is wealth derived2 7
From labor usefully employed upon
natural objects"
This makes it quite clear that wealth
is not everything" that supplies the
wants of man but merely those articles
which supply the wants Of man in which
alaborn is embodied. This chapter also
contains an explanation Of "use- value"
and exchange value, with, also, another
erroneous definition:
"What is capital:
Capital is the result of past labor de-
voted to present production"
This definition does not seem very
clear it has journalistic flavor of ann
biguity which is not quite agreeable.
"The instrument of labor" or athe appa
ratus of production" is a much more clear
and concise definition.
Following this is an explanation of
how the landlord gets his rent; how the
capitalist gets his profit; of the ''iron
law of wages" of surplus value" The
improvement which Socialism would
effect is thus described "The classes
who live in idleness on the fruits Of
the labor of other people would be inn
proved off the face of the earth, every
one being obliged to take his share of
honest work. Joynes admits that the
ssupper" class works, but very rightly
alleges that their work consists in per-
fecting and organizing the arrangements
for plundering the laborers.'
The wit contained in such questions as
docs the progress of civilization de-
crease surplus value Has the capitalist
no conscience ?" is not likely to be ap-.
preclated by the upper" class One Of
the best definitions in the catechism is !:
"What do you mean by the word .ex-
plot n
"To exploit is to get more than one
gives in a bargain
Two more quotations will be as much
as this article will reasonably hold, and
more than is necessary to show the
value of this publication.
This is one example of innocent look
ing irony which is characteristic of the
author:
aDo not the rich support their own
hunkeys, and maintain in comfort those
who produce luxuries for them?
Certainly not. These people are
maintained entirely by the workers.
though the maintenance is passed
| through the hands of the rich, who
therefore imagine that they produce it"
The similarity between The old and
modern slavery is very pithily put in
these passages
"Whas similarity is there between the
slave-ownlng and the capitalist system?
"The parallel IS complete, with the
SINGLE exception that force was used in
place of fraud. =
Explain this. 49,. 4.
"The slaye-owner received the whole
produce of the slaves toll, and returned
to him part of 1t in the shape of food,
clothing and shelter. The capitalist
takes the whole produce of the laborer's
toll, and returns to him such proportion
of it as will provide him with necessa-
ries. - '-s: II
What constitutes the chief difference
between capitalism and slaye-owning?
"The fact that the capitalist goes
through the form of BARGAINING with the
laborer as to the amount Of the portion