The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1900-02-12
LEO AND LABOR QUESTION.
John ID. o'Brien Addresses Socialists
on the Pcpe's EncycifcaI.

On the ropes Encyc1fcaI.
'"The Pope's Encyclical" was the sub
ject of an address by John D. O'Brien
before section st. Paul of the Socialist
Labor party at Assembly halls yesterday
afternoon. Mr.. O,Brien opened his ad
dress by stating that the room in which
the meeting was held was In the early
day when st. Paul was a small village
the Office Of Gov. Davis Mr. O'Brien
conterded that the popes encyclical Of
eight years ago on the labor question
was only an incident of the great social
drama Pope Leo, the religious head of
upwards of 100000, 900 people, in it very
fully set forth his views upon the social
question. The communication was OPP
posed to the general ownership of prop
erty to the extent that it excluded the
right of individuals to own and collect
property.
1t was the inherent nature of man to
hold property. An abrogation of such
right would take from man his 1ndividu-
atty. The right was part of the dignity
Of. man. The Scriptural injunction, "Ry
the sweat of thy brow thou shalt earn
thy Bread" gave divine approval OF
mans right to acquire property individ-
ual]y. However, this was to be limited
by justice. Every man was to be paid
a fair compensation for his labor, not as
u
right The pope also approved of the or
ganization Of labor for protection and
betterment along many lines. He did not
direct such alliances, but he believed
them productive of good. The privileges
and rights of the laborfng man should be
respected and his comfort and welfare
looked after by the employer as duty.
The speaker stated that all right-rninded
men were socialists, in the best that
the term implied. 1t would be difficult to
find a man who would not admit that he
was q socialist, as the term applies to
an equitable distribution of the worlds
goods and blessings. However, 1t was
not possible, nor practical, for one man
to come along and say to man having
81: "Give me half" 1t would be difficult
to apportion wealth in that way. Some
men were lazy, some were diigent, some
fast, others slow, and no basis could be
arrived at that would be equitable to all
men.
All were agreed upon the advantages of
a better social system, but no two would
agree upon the details. However, that
was a matter of congratulation. 1t was
only the ignorant man who was able to
see but one side of question, and the
wisest philosopher Of antiquity was wise
enough to know that he did not know
ANYTHING. The general end, however,
was the incentive for the laborS of all,
and the mere matter Of details was not
important so long as the fixed principles
were well established in the minds OF the
people.
Mr.. O'Brien believed that Socialism re-
iected religion Since that movement
stood for the betterment of the human
race. it was patent that it could accom-
plish nothing except through unseiiish
ness, and nothing taught the principles
of mans brotherhood to man better than
religion. He believed that from the first
there existed an antagonistic feeling on
the part of socialism towards religion,
He thought it a strange anomaly that
this condition should exist, but 1t was
very apparent. The speaker asserted
that there should be no estrangement De-
tween religion and socialism, as the prin-
ciples taught by the latter round source
In the belief in eternal God. The most
primitive race Of men, the most barbaric-
ali had some sort Of religion, however
crude and far from true ideals OF re-
ligion. Religion was a part of man, and
cou,d not be isolated. Mr. o Brien pre-
scented a very comprehensive argument
IN favor of a closer relation with rel1g-
ion ON the part Of the socialistic move
rnent.
w. B. Hammond replied to Mr.. y Brlen
that socialism did not oppose Individual
ownership except when it was capitai OF
cornorate interests He thought that re-
ligion had done very little during the
century for the laboring man.