The Yakima herald. [volume] (North Yakima, W.T. [Wash.]) 1889-1914, 1901-11-05
The Right to Life.

I'VE hold these truths to be self-evl-
dent that all men are created equal,
and endowed with certain inalienable
rights: that among these are life, liberty,
and the pursuit of happiness; that to SEE
cure these rights governments are insti-
tuted among men,"
No one will be found to deny the above
truth neither will any one be found to
make objection to the statement that the
first duty OF society to its members is
that of safeguarding the first and high
est right of its members-the right to
life.
Since what we call modern civilization
has had an existance, it has been prin-
ciple subscribed to by all governments
and people that it is the first and high
est duty of the state to protect the lives
Of the citizens. For the purpose OF doing
40 the police, the courts, the army and a
large part of the machinery of govern
ments have existed. We NAV even go
so far as to say that the state, which does
not at any cost and to the utmost of its
resources, safeguard the lives of its citi-
zens, forfeits all claims to their alleg-
fence. But while processing this prin-
ciple so broadly in words, we completely
ignore the greater part of its meaning
We wholly overlook and disregard the
part to which life is exposed on the eco
nomic side-the side of hunger and thirst
and cold. We go on the principle that
it is only by knife and bullet or some
other form of physical violence that life
can be endangered, as if hunger, thirst
and cold-in a word, economic want
were not far more constant AMI dead
ly foe to existance than all other forms
Of violence together. We overlook the
plain fact that anybody who by any
means, however indirect or remote,
takes away or curtails one means of sub
sistance attacks his life quite as danger
ously as could be done with knife or bull
let-more so, in fact, for against direct
defending himself. We fail to consider
that no amount OF police, judicial and
and military protection can prevent one
from perishing miserablv ii he has not
enough to eat and wear
If it is wise for the state to protect the
ffves of its citizens against physical vio-
ience why not also protect them against
economic want and guarantee to them
the means OF sustaining life? But, it is
said that it would not do for the state
tode for the individual or help him to
do that which he is able to do for HIM
self, and that the collective organization
shold be appealed to only when the
power OF the individual is unequal to the
task OF self defense" yet we know that
protect himself and family against vio-
lence from any source, and finds it far
easier to do so than to protect them
against want. The odds are far greater
against him in the latter struggle than
they are in the former. Why then
should the collective force OF society be
devoted without stint to safeguarding
him against violence, which he could do
for himself fairly well, while he is lett
to struggle against hopeless odds for the
means of a decent existance.
What day in the year has ever passed
IL which the number of deaths. and the
physical and moral anguish resulting
from the anarchy OF the present econo-
mic struggle and the crushing odds
against the poor, have not outweighed
as hundred to one that same days rec
ord of death or suffering resulting from
violence? FIR better could society full
81 it, recognized duty oi safeguarding
the lives Of its members ii, repeating