The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1907-02-05

duet and utteranccs of the nations eX-
ploitcrs. No institution is too sacred
for them to dcfile--EoVernment, the
home and the church have alike suf-
fcred ut their hands
Aside from Inheritance the only
honest method of accumulation is by
rendering to society Il service equal
in value to the compensation drawn
from society. The word honest has
too often been used to describe every
transaction that was not punishable as
q crime, but it can not properly be
used to describe any transaction which
is One-Sided. Reciprocal advantage
an exchange Of equal ValueS-thiS
must be assumed if buiness is to stand
a moral test The application of such
a test by the individual would in itself
go toward the establishment of bust
ness upon a sound basis. Almost all,
ii not all, injustice can be traced to
the effort Of one individual to take
advantage of another. Doubtless this
attempt has often been made thought
les"ly-that is, by the employment Of
cuStO mary methods without stopping
to examine into them. 1t is probably
true that Il large proportion of the
wrong done through illegitimate bust
ness methods is done without deliber-
ate intention to wrong. When Il Chi
cago banker was exposed in wrong
doing recently a government Official
threw the mantle of charity over him
and said that he only did what others
were in the habit of doing. But this
excuse will not stand at the bar of
conscience. No collusion between
Wrong-doerS. no iOng-standing custom
can change the moral character of a
transaction, and when the searching
process begins no one Will delude him
self with the argument that others
also are guilty.
SDoils Divided Are Still Spoils.
The manufacturer occupies a dual
position. He sustains a relation to
those who work for him and to those
who buy from him. If he is entirely
selfish he may do injustice to both
classes. or he may advance his inter
ests by cOnspiring With one class
against the other. Some of the trusts
have sought to form an alliance with
their employees against the public and
have gone 50 fare as to promise q
division of the suoils. such a con-
eract would be indefensible in morals
even ii ii was enforceable by law
The moral quality of an act is not
determined by the character of the
oenetIciaries y private monopoly
mlSh' De less objectionable if all the
pecuniary advantages secured by it
were fairly divided among those who
work for it. but to say that a private
monopoly is necessarily good because
the WaGe-earnerS in its employ raap
all the benefit is equivalent to saving
that the laborer can do no wrong.
While as a rule. the wealth producers
receive too small Il share Of the prod
ucts of their toll, the remedy is not
to be found in allowing them to in
crease their share by conspiracy with
the trust magnates-fOr, in doing so
they would be t~espassing upon the
rights of other wealth producers as
Well as upon the rights of the general
public-but in legislation which will
eliminate the principle of private mo-
~AOpOly and protect all alike. But ig-
norng, for the sake of argument, the
moral element involved the wage
earner cannot afford as matter of
policy, to assist the trust riagnates in
cornering the market for the same
greed which leads the owner Of 4