The Colfax chronicle. [volume] (Colfax, Grant Parish, La.) 1877-1981, 1892-04-09
The True Remedy.

Some time ago / came across . little
paper containing an article called Lii
quor's War on Labor" After advo.
eating the closing of drnm-shops rs the
cure for the conflict between labor and
capital it asks. "Nhat Does Labor
Want?" And replies summed up in
few words it is:
First The right to do good work for
bread" Second The right to get
good bread for work" presume that
bread in the above quotation stands, in
the writer's mind, for all useful pro-
ducts of labor. for otherwise it would
have very little sense In it. since IMAM
can not live by bread alone" now
any more than formerly. This inter.
preted it is good as far as it goes, but
who is to determine how. when. and
where the laborer shall work and how
much he shall receive for his labor and
what are the good and useful things he
should get or buy with what he gets for
his toll?
The article then says that 1.-The liquor
traffic is in unmitigated hostility to
these essential rights of the people,"
and goes on to show that less labor is
employed in proportion to the capital
used in the liquor traffic than in other
kinds of business and argues from this
that labor Is thus defrauded But is it
labor that we want or its products, and
would it be bad thing If by using the
stored mp results of labor (capitaD to
assist production we could get the
products of labor without expanding
SO much labor? Every labor-saving in.
vention tends in exactly that direction.
but according to the author of the
above mentioned article they are all
bad, as tending to reduce the labor nee
essary to produce given result.
wonder If he ever inquired what Is
the reason that 1.-The right to do good
work for bread" and ''the right to get
good bread for work" can not be exer-
cised? Every man comes into the
world with cody to be fed and clothed
and sheltered and with two hands with
which to provide food clothing and
shelter for it, and all around him lies
the land from which all supplies for his
y
does he not apply his labor to these
natural opportunities and supply his
wants? Why must he wait until some
fellow-being with no better right to
life than he has. graciously permits
him to go to work? Is it not simply
because by our Ubiquitous land system
we allow few to monopolize what
iusf1v ho1or cyc a, ol1C
Let us sweep away these restrictions
by requiring all who control land to
pay into the common treasury its full
annual value, thus rendering it un.
profitable to hold land without using it
Then all men can find plenty of work
without begging for it and it will cease
to be regarded as q boon. Thus invol-
untary poverty will cease because each
will be secured in the possession of all
he produces whether he works for him
self or for another. Then intemper-
ance born of poverty and undue wealth
viii cease because the cause is re-
moved.
But what would happen to-day leav-
ing our land system untouched, il
through prohibition or any other means
we could entirely destroy intemper-
ance? We should simply have increas-
ed the number of sober and indus
trious people competing for a chanoo
to work, and wages would thus be
crowded still lower All that could DO
saved. which had been formerly spent
for liquor would be relinquished to Sc
cure a chance to earn anything.
Iwould not have anyone suppose for
one moment that L am defending in
temperance, Far from it. i would
gladly take any just means to destroy
the terrible evil But prohibition not
only is unjust, tits an ineffective means
and tends besides TO draw attention
away from the true remedy. the de-
struction of involuntary poverty by the
freeing of natural opportunities through
the single tax on land values -E d. b..
in Justice"