Workmen's advocate., 1889-12-07

De mpltteu ana human COlSCltute will have adjusted itself to new mode of life. The weak and the strong, the talented and the ignorant, the wealthy and the poor are pttei against one ano- ther and 1t is not mere honor, mere acknowledgement that is held out as a reward to the victor. The reward is atlluence, wealth. or, to term it differ ently, crust of bread. What chances has the child that is born in miserable garret in the race against the son of the wealthy, who, from the time that he begins to talk, is surrounded by nur- ses who speak every conceivable lang uage and afterward receives not alone an education which the best tutors can afford him, but is able to learn by his own observation during excursions which extend
 ALMOST OVER THE WHOLE WORLD
 When the one enters life he is obliged to accept whatever way opens for him, because he needs the few dollars which he earns for his support; the other can await his opportunities and choose that avocation which suits best his tastes, for which he is best adapted and which pays the best. We have an inalienable right to the enjoyments of life, condi- tionay to the fultIment of our duties, and it is a clear case of injustice that, by the system of competition, the strOn E is allowed to enjoy himself at the eX- pense of the weak whom he suppresses.
 It is perfectly legitimate, and consid- cred to be in full accord with justice, that labor is bought and sold in the mar ket for the price it bring@. If the supply exceeds the demand so tell us our na- tiona economists, the price of labor will sink. If the demand exceeds the supply, it will rise, and nothing can be done to counteract the force of his eter- nal law. This would be all well and good if the laborer did not have to eat, and to dress himself, and to keep him self warm, and to bring up his children, whether the demand for his labor is large or whether it is small; but right here rests the falacy. If accidentally or artiicially, the demand is pressed down below the level of supply, 1t means privation and the loss of the means of sustenance to the unfortunate laborer. He nas no othGr choice than either to take the work at the price paid for it, or starve; being poor, he is forced to accept the plttanCe, Even today we begin to understand that, on account of such transactions, the burden of life is not distributed even y upon the shoul- ders of the people, so that each carries a share of It in true proportion to his strength It seems plausible, and 1t would fall in with our present concep- tion of justice that a person should be entitled to support or to the enjoyments of life only when he gives an equiva lent for them by his labors. It would appear, furthermore, plausible, and in accordance with our conception of iustlce that a person who stretches forth his arm for fruit should fist of all establish his right to it. But is this done? Does the money which person holds or expends indicate that he is justly entitled to the enjoyment of the things which he can buy for 1t? He may have found it, he may have stolen it, he may have cheated another person out of it. It may be the price paid to him for an evil deed, yet the bill remains silent and does not prove the right of the ow- ner to it. Still, as we look at 1t at pre- sent money brings to the bearer all the enjoyments of life, whether he is entit- led to them by his work or not. It may, perhaps, be difficult to find way how to arrange it so that the owner of every dollar bill could prove his right to it, and consequently to the commodi ties which he can buy for it, but that we are not yet ready to grasp the full import of this very injustice does not make it less unjust, Today our con science does not vbrate when we spend money, or see money spent. for which we know that we or they have notgiven an equivalent in work; yet the time will surely come when It will be con 1 sidered
 AN ACT OF CRYING INJUSTICE
 that a man should enjoy a fruit for which he has not paid by his work.
 Let me touch one more point, We have yet a number of social circles which are not allowed to run into one another. The wealthy object to an alliance with the poor, and even down i to the lowest degrees do we find that, while they are pleased to be drawn into 1 a higher order they object to the touch 1 of an inferior. Why; Does 1t degrade | us if we sell our labors to another or ! does 1t degrade some one else if he sells i his labors to us: At present our conscien- ] ces do not reprove us when we draw such distinguishing lines. Quite to the contrary, we would feel ashamed and blush if We were found to keep compan- ionShip with those that serve us. Our ideals ought to be sought for. not in the past but in the future The past has been standing far below the point of morality, upon which we are stand ing, and we are surely below that upon which future generations will stand