Waterbury evening Democrat., 1908-09-19
Editor Evening Democrat.

III hNbWoT " hH uttuOh VI SuV "
 cialist party's position In regard to
 marriage and the family. we make
 this statement. Nowhere in pro
 gramme or platform Of the socialist
 organization can any declaration be
 found that could be construed even
 by the most conservative. as attack
 Ing the sanctity of marriage or the
 home. In the socialist movement, as
 well as in all other large movements,
 which have gone through historical
 evolutions. there are always indiyid-
 uals who express their personal opin- Ions which do not at all represent the organization to which they belong.
 Therefore. August Bebel's book on Woman, Past, Present and Future" means no more to the socialist or ganization than any other book on the history of the evolution of woman.
 The book stands, as does Wester- marck's History of Human Mar riage," Morgan's Ancient Society and many others. as an historical ac-
 count of the various processes by which the human race has developed in it's struggle for just and right so- cial relationship. Like many other
 writers Bebel shows by historical re- lation that the economic dependence of woman has had much to do with her subjection in social, intellectual and moral relations to man, and in relating historical facts, Bebel him. self does not recommend that such subjection of women, or immoral conditions should continue, any more than a Christian minister who In relating the conditions that existed in the patriarchal age, as pictured in the Old Testament i'll the lives of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and many others with their many wives and cQncubines should advocate the adop- tion of such customs to-day.
 With many other able writers, so- cialist individuals have presumed to criticize the effect of the present cap italist system on the institution of marriage. For, even our learned friend, will not deny that conditions to-day in the American marriage re- lations and the American family life are not above criticism.
 How many divorces were secured in the United States last year? If 60,000 fallen women walked the streets of New York prost !tuting their bodies and souls, were there not as many? Aye, many more prosti- tute men to share their degradation? Were these men upholding a pure system of monogamy? How many little foundlings died in our cities last year, fatherless and homeless? How many prisons, asylums and re- formatories sheltered the children of our nation, grown to manhood and womanhood, in the schools of crime, afforded by tenement house condi- t!ons, where men, women and chill dren herded together in dark, noisome rooms, breed, work, eat, sleep and die? If these unemployed men number thousands in every city, is 1t likely that the workers can take upon themselves family cares and du- ties? If the average wage of the working men for the year around in Connecticut and many other states is less than $500, according to govern. ment statistics, is 1t any wonder that there are hundreds of young women and young men unmarried, and a dis cussion of the race suicide theory, a serious problem?
 And in the two extremes of society produced by the fact of the existence of class of idle men and women, living on the labor of others, these nvt ota oIo r1n class, we find anything but ideal mar riage conditions.
 Where the extreme of luxury and idleness prevails young American girls are bought and sold exchang- ing for titles, borne by degenerate sons of Europes aristocracy their entire hope of human love or happi- ness. Is 1t much wonder that the editor of the Socialist Democratic Herald" (not party owned paper) i uttered his opinion. Love can and should be the only bond of marriage. No doubt feeling with all nobleness of heart that a marriage with love as its basis principle would be more lasting, more sacred and certainly purer than one consummated by commercial barter and sale.
 Of course living under capitalism 1t is hard for any one to have an jun- selfish conception of an ideal state where men and women shall have time and opportunity to develop their minds and bodies, so that they can realize what a beautiful thing normal, free womanhood and man. hood would be-by free" social fists always mean, free from econom- 4c slavery. If men and women were all strong and healthy with their cares and troubles, brought about by stern economic necessity, all remov- ed where all would be sure of liv- ing by working few hours each day, what change would take place in the home. Men would have time to get acquainted with their children. With the cares of the household lessened by greater industrial free dom, and the collective ownership Of gas, electric power, etc. Women would have more time to study the profession of mother hood-wonld have the necessary knowledge to instruct their daugh- ters in the sacred principles of.wife- hood and maternity. Then, almost any sane person would agree that there would be great change for the better in the home and in the relation. Surely, if ignor- ance, economic worry and commer- cialism could be eliminated from marriage, the future would bring lever dfvorces and wrecked homes.