Workmen's advocate. (New Haven, Conn.) 1883-1891, 1889-10-26

opinion demands thing, it will be
done just as well without law as with
one | think Mr.. Pentecost can ex-
plain it,
1.-THE powers Of. the army, police"
etc, are "wholly for evil" | will cite
case. A lot of men working in fac
tory resigned all at once. They ac-
cepted the principle that they had no
right to their positions after leaving. A
lot of poor, hungry men, out of work
for long time, weak and despairing
were hired in the factory. The first lot
came with bricks, ETC., to drive the new
lot away; not claiming a superior right
to the positions, but to make strin.
gency in the labor market, so that their
services would again be needed. Now,
the police interfered and protected
those Other men as they worked to get
food for hungry wives and children.
That was 'evil," hence to drive out the
poorer men, letting their families
starve, would have been good" OF
course greater outside causes made it
necessary that one lot of men must be
out of work; but that does not affect the
issue of the moment; and the chief
|
ship of vacant land" according to Mr.
| Pentecost, which was sustained by the
opinion of the Large majority" who
by coming to think" are to apply the
remedy.
y
Editor Stuart, of the ndividualia.
wrote pamphlet on Natural Rights,
Natural Liberty and Natural Law"
His banner carries these words: Every
person has natural right to do what
soever he wills, provided that in the
doing thereof he infringes not the equal
right of any other person."
He tests every law by this principle.
1t is pleasatn, harmless and elastic
motto. Any child can use it; or any
childish person whose opinions on ''the
equal rights of any other person." are
warped by false training. We must
elect judges who will be guided by this
principle instead of statutes and preced-
ents. A very good plan indeed, if only
people would elect judges on an issue
! they cannot comprehend.
Now, Mr.. Stuart says, in his paper,
that the main issue is between Rational
lndividualism and Collective Coercion.
A man may conscientiously violate this
principle lowing to false education) and
majority elected judge of equity pun
ish him. Is this not Collective Coer.
cion? But it is for the Right hence
justified; any doctrinaire says the
same. Then it is hard to see how men
will vote for judge of equity who will
| ignore statutes any sooner than they
will vote for statute based upon this
''first principle" In either case it is
Collective Coercion.
That which Mr.. Stuart implies by the
term natural differs from the popular
meaning, and | think he is wrong BY
natural rights, natural liberty and natu-
raj law we commonly understand the
rights, liberty and law that would obtain
in the absence Of artificial or conven
tional devices or customs. But Mr.
Stuart means just rights, just liberty
and just laws, Whatever is sanctioned
by his first principle" is natural; what
ever it prohibits is not natural. Right
is natural, wrong unnatural 1t is a
question of fact. Either tyranny, inc
| qualitys and injustice are natural or
they are not. Where can we go for
proof, except to those instances which
mans devices and agreements have not
modified?
The mouse has no natural rights. if a
cat is near; and the cat, by nature, de-
pritPs the mouse of what Mr.. Stuart
would call its natural rights and natural
liberty. Indeed, Mr.. Stuart quotes, in
support of his position, A. II. Stephens,
who says:
mo person has any natural right to
wantonly hurt or injure another. The
object of government is to prevent or
redress injuries of this sort; for in
state of nature, without the superior re-
straining power of government, the
strong aroa,ld rici0usly impose upon the
freak. Upon entering society however,
for the purpose of having their natural
rights secured and protected, the weak
do not give up or surrender any portion
of their priceless heritage, in any gov
eminent constituted and organized as it
should be-"
a more careless use of words could
not be imagined. The above comedies
that primitive men, strong and weak, are
related as the cat and mouse are related.
Remove restraint and the strong tend to
viciousness, and devour the weak; and
the lower we go the more literally is the
devouring done, until we reach canni-
ballsm, natures own cat and mouse
scheme. The rights of the weak are the
same as those Of the mouse. This
priceless heritage is not to be sur
rendered on entering society. But it is
overcome just as mems devices overcome
any natural evil, The right of the weak
to life is thus acquired. by agreement or
compact of men, to combine and over
come nature, just as they might COM
bine to overcome malaria by draining
country. No man has a natural right
to live in marsh: but by fortifying his
system with medicines mans deyicel or