Hartford labor., 1894-10-20

at this non sequitur for the absurdity of the notion that there would be no capital if there were not capitalists will be as ob- vious to intelligent men as might the fool- ishness of the assertion that "there would be no potatoes
 If There Were no Potato Bugs. Likewise will his plea seem ridiculous, that the Astors and the vanderbilts have abstained from eating the houses and To- comotives which a certain category of la- bor-scantily fed, poorly clothed and mis- erably sheltered by other labor-has alone produced. For it will be seen that they might with as much reason claim the re- ward of abstinence for not having eaten the earth, on which their houses and rail- roads stand. and valuable part of which they own although they had no more to do with the emerging of the earth from primative chaos than they had with the growth of cities and the existence of railroads. So will
 The Stamp of '.Ingenious TomfooI-
 ery''
 be put on the ancient claim already dis allowed by Adam Smith a century ago, 
 by the wealthy classes upon the pro- ducers of Iuxuries and the servant class is public benefaction; for it will then ap- pear most plainly D that this generous patronage is bestowed upon certain workers at the expense of other workers, who produce the necessaries for all, but in return receive a small share only of those l rie at all Qf 111y ies that are produced or enjoyed by others. and CD that the remuneration of the labor thus diverted from productive to wasteful employment is considerably less than it would be if directed in its legiti- mate channels. Lastly. the merriment of society will reach it's climax when the authorized
 Mouthpiece 9ssf Capitalistic Anarchy l will apologize for the stupendous misman- agement of the natural resources and me I chanical powers at the command of his | class with the soft remark that the men of that class st'could not if they would.
 and would not if they could, prevent the \ general public from profting largely by their accumulated wealth. 7 Largely. The
 humo1 of it-ever 50 ghastly in the light - = sssslzs.
 t.sction of our anzddle clzss by bank
 ruptcy, of the rising intensity of the
 struggle for life among our professional
 classes. of the growing numbers in our
 permanent army of idle laborers. and of the consequent
 Increase of Poverty and Crime | will very truly be irresistible, MT. Batter son. You will observe that have touched | only those passages of your paper in
 which you plead for the preservation of
 capitalstfc anarchy and by fnunendo | would have it understood that the people
 must not look to Socialism for practical
 solution of our social problems. It were, indeed, pueri1e to discuss the methods you 1 propose. in the name of capitalistic anar- l chy, for the suppression of proletarian an- | archy. The germs of the latter are in the | body of the former. Having imported the l first you cannot by quarantine regulation, protect the country from invasion of the | second, which is now indigenous; just as l having at the foundation of the Republic,
 imported from England the system of pro- | duction by machinery flor the exclusive
 Benefit of Capitalist Class you cannot now, by custom regulation of foreign products or even by the abso-
 lute prohibition of immigration, protect l the American -worker-ever so "dear'' to
 you-from the competition of pauper Ia-
 bor, which has also become indigenous l If you were practical scientist MT. Bat
 terson, instead of being cimply an erudIte | dilettante, you would not attempt to sup press an effect without first suppressing | the cause. The cause here is capitalism,
 and Socialism alone, by 'suppressing it, can l suppresss anarchy. Respectfully. LUCIEN SANIAL. New York, Sept 30. 1894.
 l MIR. BATTERsON's REPLY. To MT. Lucien Sanial, New York: l Dear Sir:-I am very glad after two
 months of silence, to find that my paper | contained little for your objectionable | criticism. I have read with respectful l interest your 5arraignment of the "ru1- | ing or managing class,'' but you are very 1 greatly in error when you put me down | as belonging to that class.
 I Have Never Held Public Office, l and perhaps for that reason I have too ! often expressed my own dissatisfaction, with less generosity towards that class | than should have done, if I had ever been one of the rulers myself. Like | yourself I am one of the people, and in-
 terested in everything and anything | which tends to promote the public well | fare. claim no higher privilege, and stand on no higher plane of citizenship l than you enjoy.
 Your Right to ChaIIenge and criticise my words was not disputed even though your associates did not 1 favor me with your name, nor grant me
 the honor of even an informal introduc-