The Caldwell tribune. [volume] (Caldwell, Idaho Territory [Idaho]) 1883-1928, 1903-09-19
REPLY 70 NsR. GARY.

pen Of E. Francis Garyin which the
gifted writer undertakes to answer
some questions put to him by the
editor Of THE TRIBUNE few weeks
ago, THE TRIBUNE is always
pleased to present the serious views
of others on public questions, and
endeavors to ascertain and accept
the truth always. AS Mr.. Gary
has approached the discussion
ID q serious and respectful manner.
he is entitled to most courteous
treatment, and it shall be our pleas
ure to accord it to him.
We asked him to explain the
difference between Socialism and
Bellamyism. Our purpose in ask
ing for the explanation was to as
certain whether or not Socialists
looked forward to and aimed to es-
tablish that social condition which
Mr.. Be1lamy, first in Looking
Backward, pictured, and subse-
quent1y, in the Nationalist, advo-
Gated. Mr.. Gary does not explain
the difference between Socialism
and Bellamyism, consequently we
are still in the dark as to whether
Socialists go to the full length of
Bellamyism or stop at some inter
mediate point. We asked Mr.. Gary
to explain the difference between
Socialism and Communism, and he
gives a dictionary definition of the
two words. That is a very made
quate explanation, which may be
seen at once by looking up the die
tionary difnition of Republican
and Democrat. Webster says, a
Republican is one who favors or
prefers Republican form of gov
eminent, and Democrat is one
who is an adherent of Democracy.
That kind of definition is all right
for primary class in the public
school but would not amount to
much as an explanation of the diff
ference between the Republicans
and Democrats ofthe United States.
Our purpose in asking for an ex-
PLANTATION OF the difference between
Socialism and Communism was to
ascertain the point at which the
one ended and the other begun.
Mr.. Gary enlarges somewhat on
the dictionary by saying, "Social-
ism stands for collective ownership
of all the things that it is necessary
to own collectively" Take that in
connection with the dictionary def
milton of Communion which he
gives and accepts, which is, Gown
ership ofallproperty, Collectively"
and the only difference we perceive
is that Socialism stands for the col
lective ownership of all property
necessary to be owned collectively,
while Communism stands for the
collective ownership of all property.
What we would like to know is
what property necessity teaches
should be owned collectively, be-
cause until the invoice is made
no man can say whether he is a
Republican, a Socialist or Com
munist. Mr.. Gary says that So
cialism teaches collective ownership
of "all the tools, appliances and
means OF production" but gives
private ownership to each producer
of all he produces. Very we'll. We
put a man on a farm. The land is
owned collectively by all the people
of the world; the pillow is owned
collectively, the mower and the
reaper, the wagon and the horses
are the property of the community.
Il is reasonable presumption that
the community cannot give man
q farm and equip it for nothing.
So the man must be held to yield
upa certain amount of his products
to the community which furnishes
him with the means Of production.
In the fall, he gathers crop of tur.
nips and artichokes. and starts out
to make FIRST payment on his tools
and teams. Now who is to say
how many arthichokes it takes tc
pay for q bay horse, or how many