Fergus County argus. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1886-1946, 1903-02-18

W W iHS PCVP'Si
Will not pay the present private owners
anything, either. This will not be con-
tscation,' but restitution. The present
owners 'confiseated' all this private
property through the exploitation Of
the w~age-esrners. We will simply take
u own"
The Miner very properly asks. do
the patrons of the Butte high school in
dorse these sentiments?"
1t might also be asked, does any fair
minded, sensible American endorse
such sentiments?
1t is hardly necessary to dissect the
above as each line states a falsehood
80 vicious and vile that every word car.
ries its own condemnation.
This organ Of the Butte socialists is
not satisfied with government or mu-
nicipal ownership of public utilities
about which there is a chance for
rational discussion and experiments
ion., but 1t goes further and says the
socialists propose to take over the pri-
vately owned industries of the world
and it will not be c~onfiscation, but
restitution"
And yet those who subscribe to such
a doctrine are sensitive about the term
anarchist being applied to them. The
carrying out of the above declarations
would lead to nothing less than an
archy. The man who writes such stuff
has the spirit of anarchy within him.
It means that the mar who has by
his own energy, brains, frugality, cap
ital and enterprise, accumulated some
property or established an industry or
business must turn it over without
compensation for the benefit of not
"all of the people" as the paper states
because all of the people are not ask
ing for anything Of the kind, but for
the benefit of the ignorant, the shift
less, the Incorporate, the incapable,
the vicious and u~nprincipled who are
making such an unreasonable demand.
There probably " was a decla-
ration of principles by any party that
did not contain some good features.
Socialism is not an exception. But
taken as a whole il is pernicious, dan
gerous and impracticable.
Government and municipal owner
ship. while embraced by the new party,
is advocated by many modern thinkers
and writer's on political economy, but
not with the idea Of c~onfiscation as a
means of possession. Conservative
men, however, do not regard govern.
ment ownership of railroads. coal
mines and oil fields as practicable or
even desirable. Municipal control of
public utilities is growing in public
favor, even in the larger cities, though
it's consummation cannot be brought
about rapidly in some places owing to
existing long time franchises. Posi-.
bly, the socialists would urge that this
should be no impeachment, and proba'
bly, not IL force instead Of right and
Justice is to rule.
Writing upon this question Of mu
nicipal ownership the Chicago Record
Herald says:
There is a growing sentiment in
favor of municipal ownership simply
because the abuse of private ownership
has become intolerable, and reflection
upon the condition has shown that the
public's rights have not been properly
considered in the granting OF fran
chises. One of the consequences may
be a broader and holder theorizing as
to the public's rights, but that does
not imply a mad rush after utopiar
schemes. 1t is merely a notification
that the field for exploiting the people
in the interest of various shrewd and
acquisitive individuals is to be some
what narrowed"
This is a true statement of the facts