The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1894-10-24

satisfaction and distrust prevails among
the masses of our people? Is it not because
they do not justly share, or think they do
not justly share, in the division of what
their hands have earned? This feeling is
extensive and reaches among all classes Of
laboring people. Suffering as they think
they do common wrong, it is natural
that they should become bound together
by common sympathy; hence the forma-
ton of labor unions. We saw it manifest
ed in the recent strike, where in sympathy
with one class of laborers who thought
themselves oppressed, and who struck for
better conditions, other classes in no way
connected with them struck also.
Various schemes have been suggested to
reconcile this controversy between en-
ployers and employees, such as arbitration
and the control by the government of the
great corporations of public character.
do not intend to discuss these schemes
or attempt to point out their inadequacy
to cure existing troubles. They are sub
ject to many objections and at best do
not go to the root of the evil or the cause
of the trouble which many think make ar
bitration or governmental control neces-
sary. TO remove the cause of discomfort
and suffering among the laboring masses
and bring them into harmonious relations
with their employers is tho great object to
be attained. How can this be done? We
must first ascertain the cause of the trou-
bic before attempting to remove it.
What is the underlying cause of the
discomfort of the laboring classes? Is it
not the poverty and want they suffer by
reason Of the inadequacy of the pay they
receive for tho labor given? They see
l. l. 6 T.
corporations and tho pampered few, all
the magnificence and luxury which accu-
mulated wealth can bestow, while they
toll and even suffer for the means, the God
given right to live. Is it any wonder
that discomfort prevails among tho masses,
and that they act in concert in the effort
to improve their condition when such
state of things exists? The happiness of
people is the happiness of the individuals
who compose the mass Laws which open
the door to large fortunes by devise, by
inheritance or by speculation have no tend
ency to promote the happiness Of the peo-
pie at large and often not even the hap
piness of those for whose benefit they are
made.
Why is it that the wealth of the coun-
try, ample for the comfort and happiness
OF all, is rapidly accommodating In the
hands of few? 1t is perhaps partly due
to modern inventions which have taken
the place of manual labor and enabled one
man, by means Of capital and machinery,
to do the work Of many, thus leaving the
country filled with laborers, but unable to
find employment, and giving to capitalists
who are able to purchase machinery the
opportunity from the surplus Of laborers
to employ them at their own prices.
Rights of Man Are Superior.
But it is chiefly the laws Of property
which have enabled the few to accumulate
vast wealth while the masses live in pov-
erty. For many generations our laws have
been framed with view to the claims Of
property rather than the rights Of man.
For ages the money power has controlled
legislation the world over, and, I am
ROrry to say, has exercised q controlling In
huence in our own land for many years.
In the language of the Declaration of In
dependence "All men are created equal
and endowed by their Creator with certain
inalienable rights; that among these are
life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness "
If man has an inalienable right to life,
then he has q right to tho means which
sustain life and Of which he cannot be
Justly deprived by laws which permit one
AAinA VI nCo VI Hull w 81 6DSOrO Cnc means
Of life as not to leave sufficient to sustain
the lives Of all. II man has an inalienable
right to liberty, then he cannot be justly
deprived Of liberty by another who as
sumes tho right at his mere discretion to
abridge 1t. If man has an inalicnable right
to the pursuit Of happiness, then he can
not BIO justly deprived of that right by
laws interposed in the way of it's pursuit.
Do such laws EXIST And, il SO, how
came they into existence?
In Great Britain, whence we have de.
rived most Of our laws of property, the
policy is to build up great estates Hence
by the laws of that country land descends
to the eldest son. to the exclusion Of the
other children. Tho effect of this Is to
limit the ownership Of land to few per-
sons. Thirty-four persons in that country
own cell, 600 acres of land. The Duke of
Sutherland is said to own 1 1868, 900 acres,
and q few other dukes and earis own a
great proportion Of tho land of the United
Kingdom. What has brought about this
wide difference In the ownership of landi
Certainly the few who own the millions
of acres from which they derive revenue
in some instances Of moro than $500, 000
-.IJ, -orto1c Lov o NOT ooryo1 thoco