The Portland daily press., 1895-11-20

Ihe November NUMBER VI eHe oouiiA'
of Sociology contains an interesting
paper by Prof. Albion ". Small entitled
"Private Business is a Public Trust
Prof. Small, as is well known, is head
professor of Sociology in Chicago Uniyer-
s1ty, the institution from which it has
been alleged that PORT. Bemis was re-
Gently retired because his teachings were
not acceptable to its rich benefactors
Prof, Small writes in criticism of the
present social system, and though his
criticism is not personal and does not
hold any particular class responsible for
the defects of the system, nevertheless
the weight of it falls by the very nature
of the case upon that portion of society
which "monopolizes the productive forces
of nature which is of course the trusts
and corporations and individuals of great
wealth. Certainly Prof. Small has pre-
sented in his paper some provocation for
the arrays against him of the same in
fluencing that Prof. Bemis's friends have
alleged were potent against the latter
Aside from its intrinsic merit Prof.
Small's paper is valuable as showing that
if any attempt has been made to suppress
independent thinking and plain speak
ing at Chicago university 1T has not sue
ceeded.
Prof. Small finds the great defect OF
the present social system Of today to be
that it fosters the industrial indepen-
dence of the diminishing few, and the
Industrial dependence of the increasing
many" "In so far" he says "as agita-
tors for social changes squint toward the
notion of equal reward for unequal work.
or equal division of products of industry,
they seem to me covetous not only of the
impossible but of the unjust, the unreas-
enable, and consequently of the wholly
undesirable. So long as men contend for
such extravagances the real vice OF our
civilization will be obscured." This real
vice in Prof Small's estimation is that
it Incorporates the assumption that a
portion of society may rightfully monopo-
lize the productive forces of nature, SO
that other men must ask the PERM ssion
of the monopolists to draw on the re-
sources of nature and thus practically
denies to the unprivileged GLASS not
merely rishtful share of goods, but an
intrinsic claim to any share at ALL "."The
| fundamental grievance of classes" says
Prof Small "against other classes in mod
ern society is that the supposed offenders
are violators of this primeval law OF reci-
procity. Criticisms of institutions or OF
the persons operating them resolve them
selves into charges that whereas the par
ties in question are presumed to be useful
social agencies, they are in reality using
their social office for the subordination OF
public veal to private gain. This is at the
bottom the charge of the dissatisfied pro-
letarian of all classes against employers,
capitalists, corporations, trusts, monopo-
lies, legislators and administrators. This
is also in large.part the implied counter
charge against organized labor. The most
serious count in the wage earner's indict-
ment of other classes is not primarily
| that these classes draw too much pay,
| but that they are not doing the work that
their revenues are supposed to represent.
They are exploiting their fellows instead
of serving them. The question of the
amount of LAY which the alleged delin-
ouents should draw, if their presumed
service were actually performed, is logi.
cally a secondary consideration. The just
grievance of the poor man is not so much
| that another mans income is thou sand
or ten thousand, or million year, as
that either figure is more than its pos
SCISSOR earns"