The herald., 1896-12-06
HOI POLLOI VS.. LAND MONOPOLY
BY THEOPHRASTUs
A BRIEF FOR PLAINTIFFS

| has been made manifest with reference
to the interest or estate of the children
of men in this material earth, and that
upon grounds other than those upon
which revealed religion, SO called, has
builded churches. We shall attempt to
establish the equitable interests of our
clients to an equal, undivided per capita
tenancy at will upon the earth by an ar
2ument in the domain of pure reason
and metaphysics.
An intelligent first cause, or Architect
of the Universe being conceded, we
must attribute the existence of the
planet upon which we live to the creative
edict of deity; and since intelligent crea-
ton involves design, the Creator must
/ have had some design inits construction.
and If man is the highest of all God :
creatures, the world must have been
I made for him. David. King of Isra 81.
said of man. some thousands of years
ago. Thou has made him a little lower
than the angels" and again: Thou
has put all things under his feet"
Now, If the world was made for man,
il should be adapted to his uses and ac-
comodation and that too. in such mode
and manner as to be most highly condu-
Give to the preservation and whole
some evolution of the race.
That the world was made for man IS
so forcibly illustrated, in the manifest
adaptation of the earth to supply all t.Ie
physical needs of the human family, and
mans obvious superiority and mastery
! over all other animated creation. and his
ability to subject the resources of the
earth to his needs and uses. that ampli-
! fication of argument upon the proposi-
ton would seem to be work of super-
erogation. We shall assume the promo
sition to be incontrovertible. Standing
! upon that rock, We think the inference
strictly logical that the preservation an j
n hn .
least resistance, is the manifest will Of
, the Creator.
In order to the preservation and
! wholesome evolution of the race we
/ deem 1t easily demonstrable that man.
IN organized society, should trammel the
INDIVIDUAL as little as possible in his de
Velopment, recognizing that in him are
inherent, and with him abide certain
lnalienable rights, and among these are
life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happj-
ness: That the preservation to the in
olVidual OF these Indispensable rights (as
lnVolvlng either his existence, or his
wholesome developmenD is, or may be
Vi vast consequence to the race. is dem
! onstrably certain. The some time
latent abilities in formative irdividuals
, which have after become patent and
! then potent for good service to the race.
must suggest to us what the world NAV
| have lost and may lose by denial 1n
| =
herent rights to particular individuals
=, ana mere, If the court please, we think
the onus is upon the sponsors for land
monopoly to show that the sequestration
ahc monopolization of the Garth to the
! exclusive use and behoof of some mon
IS consistent, not alone with the preser-
| Natlofl OF the race and its wholesome
evolution, but that such seauestration
and monopolization does not trench 17nor
! or curtall the before mentioned inaIien
able rights of every Individual who is
a non participant in such monopoly. or
in other words, the plaintiffs in this case
! however. we DO not deem it important
| to insist that the onus probandi should
be shifted to the defendant in this case.
| We take 1t upon us to establish affirm
atively that land monopoly is utterly in
imicai to and inconsistent with the pres
| ervation to every individual of his
| inalienable rights. venture to cite the
court to the reasoning Of a learned Judge
not now upon the wnoIsack but 4 dis