The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1896-12-02

| qualified thought. l did. however, use
such language. but in a sense and with
| meaning limited and special. and in
connection with other language which
| plainly showed that 1t was used In
| qualified and special sense. and Illus
trated my meaning by reference to in
stincts which plainly showed the limit
ed and special application made of 1t.
NOT CORRECTLY QUOTED.
"The quotation is a garbled. isolated
| extract taken from a public address of
several years ago, wrested from its con-
text, perverted in meaning and de-
prived of the benefit of all accompany
ing explanatory language. 1t Is circu-
latiOn in the partisan press In this mu-
| tilated form Is an apt instance of the
truth of the old proverb that half
| truth is a whole lie." ! was discussing
| the claimed "mutuality" between labor
and capital, and had by process of rea-
| soning Gmmaterial to the purposes of
this explanation and immaterial wheth-
er right or wrOng) reduced the words
labor and capital" in their last an
alysis. to what l deemed their equiva-
| lent expressions, use" and "Owner-
ship''-"use" by the laborer "owner-
ship by the capitalist. I then asserted
| in the user of capital right paramount
| to the owner. but in immediate cOnnec-
| tion Herewith l drew distinction be-
tween Kinds of capital.
Quoting enough Of the address to
| show the distinction drawn, ! said:
Before passing from this subject let
| me draw a distinction proper to be OBJ
| served. and yet so plainly existing that
1t would seem superfiuous to call at
| tention to it The distinction
l wish to draw exists between that
| capital in which use and ownership
can be combined, or more accurately
speaking, in which ownership alone
that capital which for purposes of use
| by himself, but for use by someone else.
RIGHTS OF LABOR.
ut Is manifest that In one Of these
cases mutually does exist between
labor and capital, or between labOrer
and capitalist. because the qualities OF
ownership and use are combined in one
person: in fact, the distinction between
laborer and capitalist is blOtted out,
and the two are amalgamated into one.
and the man-the human being-pOs-
sesses in such case as absolute right
| to his capital, that is. his tools or his
clothes or other articles of personal
| use as he does to the limbs Of his body,
| because they are, like his limbs. the
instruments with which he labors,
| which he uses.
"But on the other hand, the man who
possesses a thing not for the purpose
of his own use, but for purposes of
somebody else's use, and whose interest
in it is limited to the compensation
| which he can extort from others for the
privilege of using it occupies an entire
ly different position and must be viewed
from an entirely different standpoint"
I then illustrated the kind Of prop
erty falling within the last mentioned
class and the line Of distinction be-
tween it and the one first mentioned by
citing the monOpolies and the quasi
public institutions, such as the trusts
and combines, the railroads, etc, claim
| ing that as to such the paramount right
| of the user existed not only in the ma
ture of the property and purposes to
which dedicated by the owner. but the
same had been confirmed to him by
legislative enactment and decisions of
the courts.
HAS PRECEDENTS.
While not a part of the address in
question, 1 take the liberty in elucida-
tion of the distinction l tried to draw
between the two classes Of property and
| in defense of the position assumed by
me to cite some eminently republican
| authority.
William A. Phillips, twice Republican
congressman from the state Of Kansas,
| says in his book. Labor, Land and
Law" pages 421-2, capital is of two
kinds. The capital which is produced
for use and used by the man who owns
it, such as houses. cattle, horses, ve-
| hicles, furniture, machinery, etc. Then
| hGv 10 ha fol hac ,Y,,p1-
| lated that he does not personally need
| or use. Out of this he expects to make
an income from those he permits to use
| it. This Is the kind of capital that re-
quires the supervision Of the public, or
| it will impoverish all labor and create
| an aristOcracy among men.
Out of this kind of capital Chief JUS
| tice Waite, Of the United States
Supreme court, in his celebrated decis-
ion Of Mum against the people of Illi-
| nois (94 United States Supreme court
report), affirming the right of the legis-
| lature to control the charges of rail-
road, warehose and other like compan-
| les, said: when. therefore, one de-
votes his property to use in which the
public has an interest, he, in effect
grants to the public an interest in that
| use, and must submit to be controlled
by the public for the common good to
| the extent of the interest he has thus
created"
FAvORS WOMAN SUFFRAGE.
| If, therefore, when man dedcates
his property to the use Of the public he
grants to the public an interest in the
use of the same, and must submit to
public control In respect to such use
| 1t necessarily follows that the rights of
| the public, to wit-the users, are para
mount to those Of the owners.