Workmen's advocate. (New Haven, Conn.) 1883-1891, 1889-07-20
LAND AND MACHINERY.

SECOND LECTURE BY LUCIEN SANIAL.
| shall begin with the broad and
sweeping proposition that the wage sys-
tenn, as we see it in this country, was
borrowed from the despotic fabrics of
the Old World, and is in direct opposi-
ton to the aims of democratic govern
ment as plainly defined by the Declare
ton of Independence; 50 that he only,
regardless of the place of his birth, can
who demands the abolition of that sys-
tenn.
shall take it for granted that the
founders of this republic intended to
establish a democracy-thati is, accord
ing to the well-known American defini-
ton of the word, government of the
people, by the people, for the people.
In democracy, as we Americans I'm
derstand it, the right Of government is
vested in the people.
Resting upon this fundamental prin-
ciple, the democratic theory of politics
is that the machinery of government is
owned and controlled by the whole
body of citizens, each having an equal
right in the determination and conduct
of all matters of public policy, and
therefore an equal voice in the election
of functionaries, legislative, Judicial and
administrative, responsible at all times
to their constituents for the perform
ance of their respective functions.
| This presupposes state of the great
est possible equality and intelligence,
where the complete independence of the
| individual secures the fearless express
sion of his views and the untrammeled
exercise of his judgment. 1t implies a
full recognition of the value of the mi
nority and of its title to public respect
as the critical factor necessary to the
formation of an enlightened opinion;
and while requiring general compliance
with the decisions of the ajorlty for
the sake of social order it imposes no
belief in the infallibility of the past or of
the present, endangers the ripening of
IL
ton, but, on the contrary reserves all
the rights of experience and reason,
through which alone social progress is
possible.
That such state has not been reached
will hardly be denied. That in the
matter at least of equality, we are fur
Their from it to day than our American
ancestors were, may even be asserted
without fear of contradiction. The
claim that our evolution in many other
respects has been upward, and, as a
whole, vastly beneficial, may be allowed
in its fullness, and yet be no. apology for
the growing evils and destructive ten
denotes of the present day. The ques-
ton, indeed, is not whether the present
inequality of means is a progress as
compared to the past equality in the
lack of means; whether the present inc
quality of education is progress as
compared to the past equality in igno-
rance: but whether those inequalities
can constantly increase and democracy
be maintained; to which the only pos
sible reply is a most emphatical NE"
Now, while those inequalities are per
meating and actually rotting away oul
political system, it is plain enough thai
they do not proceed from it; aye. plair
enough that they do proceed from ou'
economic system.
This should be borne in mind, for i
is important: When the democratic
theory of politics was adopted in thi
J country, comparative equality OF pro
ductive means prevailed among its citi
zens. Political economy, in fact, wa
then proclaimed only because of tn
: fortuitous circumstance that no grea
, social differences had as yet resulted a
that particular time from the previousl,
established economic system. And a
it was not seen that such difference
must necessarily arise from such
system, the political theory alone com
9 manded attention, whereas the necessit
of promulgating at the same time col
responding economic theory did nc
even suggest itself.
/ am not ready to say that if the ecc
nomic problem had forced itself upo
the consideration of our revolutlonar
ancestors they would have solved it b
/ proclaiming economic equality; but
y am quite willing to assert that if the
: could have foreseen the inequalities c
the present day. and yet had refused t
thus solve it, then .hey should also
e logically, have rejected the demo
!. cratic theory of politics. They shoul