Waterbury evening Democrat., 1908-08-22

emplOy6S lnCr6aSeQ, ln some cases it was impossible that the same relationship should exist. With the breaking up of the old guilds the proletariat was left much to himself and, subject to the greed and avarice of the employer, he many times found himself and his family in direst straits. To him socialism with | its rosy prospects of amelioration recommended itself, and particularly | as the philosophic> polite and re- ligious revolution of the same time | filled his mind with false ideas of | his own importance, took away the | religious prop from under him and | spread around him an atmosphere of unbelief that restricted his vision to the merely temporal.
 The philosophy of Rousseau with its false principle that man is essen- tially good and that whatever of evil is in him is the result of the econom- ic order that recognizes proprietor ship, and the equally false principle, and one contradicted by facts, that all men are by nature equal tlAu CAlIliCu dl dlI oh0 under all circumstances to be on equal circumstances, appealed to the innate vanity of men, whilst they held out the al-
 turing prospect of a share in the
 wealth of their fellow men, and it is not marvelously strange that, with
 no religion save their own interest,
 with a want of belief in God and the
 hereafter life, with no acknowledged
 obligation save their own interests,
 socialism made rapid strides, helped
 on as it was by the upheaval of soci-
 ety during and following the French revolution. These, then, are the
 main causes that brought about the spread of socialism; the industrial,
 the philosophical, the political and the religious revolution of the eigh- teenth century.
 The history of socialistic evolution
 is interesting. With most writers it
 embraces three periods, the forma-
 tive, the scientific and the political. | France seemed to be it's natural
 birthplace and there about the mid l dle of the eighteenth century Saint
 Simon propounded his system that
 gives to labor the sole standard of
 valuation and thus in consequence | laborers are the source of all value
 and must be taken into considera-
 tion before everything else. There
 is some truth and some falsehood in
 the doctrine. Labor is undoubtedly
 a source of value and one not to be 1 slightly passed over. But there are 1 intrinsic qualities In things that do
 not depend upon labor, that are an-
 terior to labor and without which
 labor could produce nothing. Thus
 for example the natural quality of
 cohesion without which particles
 could not adhere, does not depend
 upon the workman, and yet without
 it how little could the workman do?
 The machinist for example could
 never construct a machine unless tho
 particles of metal were held to-
 gether by the attraction of cohesion
 The value of the machine lies pri
 marily, though not solely, in the
 metal.
 Contemporary with Saint-Simor
 and surviving him for some year' was Fourier, whose scheme was tC , divide society into phalanxes where each would work according to his ca pacity, where all, even the slothful would receive the necessaries of life but the industrious would be com 5 pensated each according to his merit It is not too clear how such a system . would equalize things. As a matte f of fact it proved a failure.
 I Not more successful was Cabet' l system, which placed all goods unde r the dominion of a republic. where al 9 would work in a spirit of fraterna { love and all would equally share tn }. fruits of labor If men were angel: S devoid of human passions, this sys
 tenn might have worked successful! |, But extremely chimerical as it wa ? it is not surprising that 1t met a l. early demise. and, if memory servei $ our own Texas was its ingloriou l. sepulchre.
 It The system of Louis Blanc was B. mild sort of communism consistin d chiefly in this: that suitable vorl ,- shops should be established in whiC y each should work according to h ,t ability. compensation to be made a l. cording to each ones necessitie Ie But since the necessities of eat .e would vastly vary. 1t is lneonceivab ,s how there could be any equalizatio le Perhaps the most vicious of the .d formative systems was that propose Is by Proundhon, who argued that a IS proprietorship was theft, but wOu i'd leave the right 10 possess and k trasmit to heirs what could be us'
 personally, all things else 10 be le O. to others. Just what right othe -e could have unless the right of pr le prietorship does not clearly manife S. itself. Connected with these was tl ,g cooperative system of Robert Owe nj which. however, did not eventua ie successfully either in England lt America.
 re The scientific evolution had ly origin in Germany in the earlier da m of the nineteenth century and h k for it's leader ROdbertus. whose n lg ory differed but little from that ar Saint-SimOn, since it was based up he the fundamental principle that lab Y. alone is the standard of valuation n- more detailed working out of Il n- system is that given by Marx aI complete explanation of his systs
 is not possible within the limit ld space of a short article. Briefly of consisted in a distinction between { lis use value or the utility to satii a. human wants. and exchange val rh which is the ratio in which co ,ss mOdities are exehangeable for o