The Washington herald., 1912-09-29
BY FRANCES DE SALES RYAN.

~ SALES II Il tNs
That present economic conditions de-
mand readjustment must be freely ad-
mitted by all fair-mlnded persons. The
evils of our times are, indeed, terrible
and pressing. The miserable dwellings
OF SO large number of our people in
city and country. the cruel advantage
| taken of weak and unorganized labor,
the uncertainty of employment, the fire.
quent triumph Of dishonesty, the pov-
erty-stricken old age that for so many
is the dreary prospect ahead, child and
woman labor-these and many other
evils are pressing on all sides for So
luton.
With Socialists, We all agree In con-
demning these conditions, and every
man and woman with a real human
heart Is bound in conscience to en-
deavor to remedy them. Speaking for
the opponents of Socialism, 1 declare
that the greatest need of the day is
social reform. and We are prepared to
support any reform that rests upon q
sound moral basis and that is demon
stratel to be practicable. Socialists de-
clare that they have the only remedy
for our economic evils. We claim that
their method of reform is absurd and
impracticable and that 1t would serve
to intensity the sufferings of the very
people for whose benefit II is designed.
In my debate with Mr.. KopelIn, do
not require OF him to detail the future
organization Of society under Socialism,
but I must ask that he point out from
official programmes and authoritative
sources at least the principal features
and the foundations of the new state.
Marx, Engels, Bebel, Ferrk Lebnecht
and all Of the leaders of Socialism in
Europe and America have been wonder
fully reticent when questioned regard
ing the application of their methods
of reform. The fact OF the matter is
that Socialists aims and purposes are
so vague and shadowy that they can
not undergo the test OF cross-examina-
ton.
Claim of Socialists.
Socialists claim that by their organiza-
ton of society they will remove the ex-
listing misery and inaugurate a reign OF
freedom and happiness. In representing
Socialism, therefore, as superior to the
existing universal and age-old system,
Mr.. Kopelin has the burden of proof: he
must demonstrate not only the SUI
periority, but the practical possibility of
his system by explaining away some Of
those leading questions which have al
ways been evaded and which are still
being evaded by the leading Socialist
speakers and writer's.
For example, Mr.. Kopelin. how will the
cooperative commonwealth determine
the income of each worker? Will each
worker. skilled or unskilIed. receive the
same income? II all receive the same
rate of compensation will not such a
system forever rob the superior work.
ers of a part of their superior ability?
And will not this conflict with the oft
repeated assertion of Socialists that the
workers will receive the full product Of
their toll?
II each worker should receive the full
product of his toll. who will support
the vast hords of nonproductive work
ers?
And il each worker received the full
product of his toll. some will have large
incomes, others small: and will not this
be economic inequality?
AS the capabilities of the workers will
differ under Socialism, just as they diff
fer in the various activities of life. will
you explain, Mr.. Kopelin. how and in
what way it will be possible to de-
termine the true value of each work.
ers toll? And how much more should
college professor receive than a rail-
way brakeman?
If we are to reduce the working time
to four hours a day under Socialism, as
services of 100000 more railway workers
to perform the same service that l,30O-
90 now perform? And will not this cost