Waterbury evening Democrat., 1908-09-24
(By Socialist Committee. )

It would seem from the article en- titled The Three F's of Socialism 1 that the author must be an alien from another land, entirely unac- quainted with the underlying prin- ciples on which the government of these free United States was estab- lished In attributing to socialism a programme embracing free thought, free speech, and free press, he launch es into an involved argument against such principles-so in the beginning we must trace the development of our constitution.
 In the early days of America, as every schoolboy knows, the old colo nists rebelled against being taxed by government in which they had no representation-th were legally suppressed for expressing such thoughts, in open speech, and the men who finally prepared and gave to the world that document called "The Declaration of Independence" were very brave men-and many of them were rendered homeless and poverty stricken by the "loyar' upholders of the existing form of government" under King Georges reign. The doc ument declared That all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalien- able rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happi- ness. That to secure these rights governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the government. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new gov ernment, laying its foundations on such principles, and organizing it's powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness"
 Bear in mind this is not socialist document we are quoting, but the declaration of independence of 1776." The writer necessarily car ries out his objection to free thought to free speech, as speech is but the expression of thought and no power can limit a mans thought except his own self control he says. Entire un- restricted freedom, either of thought or speech is not only forbidden by the laws of God, but is also repugnant to the natural mind. It would be we'll for our opponent to discriminate right here between liberty and "li- cense," liberty and freedom" two words dear to the heart of all Amer jeans cannot be so desecrated as the writer would insinuate, without a vigorous protest And socialists pro- test that not only have the so-called "inalienable rights to life, liberty and happiness been taken away from the working class, but that their con- stitutional rights have been abridged by a press and legal power that op- crates only for the rights of one class of society. In illustration of this let us see what is going on in society to- day:
 First of all, the constitution says: Article 1, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free ex- cICISC IACl cOl Oi dDl ms tAC II CC- dom of speech, or of the press;s or the right of the people peaceably to as- semble and petition the government for a redress of grievances" Under such a constitution then the arrest of men and women advocating peace full change of society, a change de- sired by millions. of men and women all over the world, would be decided ly illegal, but such arrests have been made in every city of the union, and not only have arrests been made but violent persecution offered to the men who dared tell the truth about existing conditions under the present order of society. Many concrete H. lustrations can be given as to what the workers mean when they claim the rights of free press. Very natur- ally. to-day. the press is largely con- trolled by capitalistic interests and by a body of men with interests en- tirely opposite to the interest of capi- taiism their rights would be ig- nored.
 All the news of the working class would be tinctured by the standpoint of the employer. If mine accident occurs. killing hundreds of poor min CTS. 1t would not be to the interest of the capitalist press to let the world know that all the lives of those working men were sacrificed by the lack of safety appliances that the mine owners did not buy because of its cost, or 1t would not be wise to