The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1897-10-24

instead Of attempting 10 moousa'e
them out Of existence.
marked instance of this Is TO be
found in an article by Frank Parsons.
who is one of Debs' colleagues IN the
Social Democracy. the Wild scheme 10
found cooperative colonies in which
everybody is 70 be permanently equal
He advocates public ownership OF
street car lines, and gives as one OF
the suggested advantages: Short
hours and high wages for workers;
reasonable hours and moderate salaries
for managers" This is the ransest
kind OF demagogy; why the distinc-
ton? Why should one set OF workers
work only short hours and managers
reasonable hours7 Are the reason
able" hours to be shorter than the short
hours; or are the short hours TO be I'M
reasonable, while only the hours OF
managers are to be reasonable? Why
should one Sc. of workers have high
wages and managers only moderate
wages? II the writer meant 10 treat
all alike and abolish class distinctions,
why not make the working hours of all
reasonable" and the pay Of all mod
crater"
Under the sensational title. Life En-
Joined, Property Exalted" another
writer denounces the issuing OF in
functions TO restrain striking miners
from destroying property. and defends
the miners on the score that they have
a right to organize. He says that until
recently courts of equity have never
attempted TO restrain the acts or regu-
late the conduct of the citizen unless
such acts or conduct clearly infringe
upon property rights. Have they ever
done more, Are not property rights
infringed when menacing body inter-
feres with the right Of another to work
il he wants to? Is there more valu
able right than that, and one which
labor is more deeply interested in
maintaining? Are not property rights
infringed when a body of citizens
threatens to and advances to destroy
that which belongs to another?
1t would be very ridiculous position
for court to be placed in, that ii
should have the power to issue an or
der, but not the power to enforce it.
1t is an essential principle of law that
the delegation Of authority always car
ries with 1t the power to enforce it.
The writer in question says the
foundation of all property rights is
based upon the right to live, the right
to liberty, and the right to the pursuit
of happiness-and extends to the hum
blest and weakest member of society.
True, it Is not limited to those who are
members of trade unions, and does not
exclude those who elect not to be
members.
The right to join union Is defended,
as if it had been assailed by injunc-
ton. This is not so; the right of
men to organize is not questioned, the
right to strike is not doubted. Injunc-
tons are never issued to prevent either,
but mischievous writer's like those in
The New Time falsify the conditions
and provoke animosities by pathetic
harangues which have no place in a
calm discussion.
Another grossly misleading feature
of the magazine is a cartoon to the
memory of the miners who were fired
at by frightened deputies, with an in
scription, Shot to death by order of
the court" Such a perversion of the
truth is absolutely criminal; 1t plays
upon ignorance and panders to preju-
dices for which there is no reason.
Pretending to be magazine OF social
progress. 1t exaggerates grievances,
distorts facts and belittles the wonder
full good there is in the freest, most ad-
vanced and best system of government
in the world.