The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1899-10-26
IMPRUDENT
MARRIAGES
A POwerfus Argument for Such Indus
trial and Economic Conditions as
Shall Insure Equal OppOrtuni-
ties for All and Special
Privileges to None.
An Article That Should BE Studied
by Every American.
(By Robert Blatchford,)

(By Robert Blatchford.)
Now, here's a letter which I am 60
Ing to answer. 1t could be answered il
few lines, but then it would crop uI
again in another form; L shall, there
fore, give it all the space it needs if II
takes me year, and 1 shall keep on
digging until have dug up every shred
of root, no matter how far the roots
may spread:
Sir: Being interested in your letters
to workingmen, 1 should like to ask
you why, in 'Merrie England and your
other writings, you say nothing about
imprudent marriages, the evils of which
you must be fully aware off,"
1t is not quite clear what the writer
means by that question. But 1 take it
that he means to imply that a great
deal of the poverty and misery of the
poor is caused by "imprudent mar
riages''
At any rate there are many who
think that if all the workers were to
give up drink, to work hard, to live
sparely, to save their earnings, and to
avoid early marriages and large fami-
lies, they would all be happy and pros
porous without Socialism.
And, of course, these same persons
believe that the bulk of the sufferings
and poverty Of the poor is due to drink,
to thriftlessness, and to imprudent mar
riages.
| know that many, very many. do
believe these things, because I used to
meet such persons when / went out lee
turing.
Now, know that belief to be wrong.
l know that if every working man and
woman in England turned teetotalar
tomorrow, if they all remained single.
If they all worked like niggers, if they
all worked for 12 hours day, if thew
lived on oatmeal and water, and If thew
saved every farthing they could spare.
they would, at the end of 20 years, be
great deal worse off than they are to.
day.
Sobriety, thrift, industry, skill. self
denial, holiness, are all good thinps.
but they would. if adopted by all the
workers, simply enrich the idle and
wicked and reduce the industrious and
righteous to slavery.
Teetotalism will not do, saving will,
not do. increased skill will not do
mean to make these things plain to
you If 1t takes me till Christmas.
l Will begin by answering a state
ment made by Sir ]. w. Mcclure NJ p
AS reported in the press, Sir John said:
There is nothing to prevent the son Of
crossing sweeper from rising to be
lord chancellor of England"
At first sight this would seem tn have
nothing to do with our friends letter
about "1mprudent marriages." But we
snail md that 1t is just part of the sar.s
great error. For this error has two
faces. On one face it says that any man
may do well if he will try, and on the
other face it says that those who do not
DO we'll have no one but themselves to
blame.
The error rises from slight confus-
ion Ct thought. Men know that a man
may rise from the lowest place in life
to almost>the highest, and they suppose
that because one man can do it, all men
can do 1t; they know that if one man
works hard, saves, keeps sober and re-
mains single, he will get more money
than other men who drink and spend
and take life easily; and they suppose
because thrift, single life, industry and
temperance spell success to one man |
they would spell success to ALL
Will show you that 'this'is amistake |!
ana VIII show you why it is a mistake.
Lei us begin with Sir Johns crossing
sweeper
Sir John tells us that "there is MOTH
ing to prevent the son of croee,ng
sweeper from becoming lord chance,,or
OF England" But Sir John doos ~.
mean to say that there is nothing to
prevent the son of some one particular
crossing sweeper from becoming chan-1
cellor; he means that there is nothing
to prevent any son of any CROSSING
sweeper, or the son Of any very poor
man from becoming rich and famous.
Now, let me show you what nonsense
this is. Sass
inere are in all England, let US say,
some two millions of poor and Trend !
less and untaught boys.
And there is one lord chancellor.
Now, 1t is just possible for one boy out
d the two millions to become lord chan
cellor; but 1t is quite impossible for all
ne boys. or even for one boy in a thous-
md. or for one boy In ten thousand. to
become lord chancellor.
sir John means that 4 boy y clever |,