The Ocala banner. (Ocala, Marion County, Fla.) 1883-194?, 1912-10-11
FROM ANOTHER SOCIALIST
Newberry, Fla, Oct. 10, 1912.

NeWDerry, Fla, Oct. III, 1917.
To the Editor Ocala Banner:
| would thank you for space enough
in your valuable paper to say few
words. 1t will be observed in the dis
cussions in your paper combating So
cialism that you deal only in generali-
ties, and in no sense particularize.
In your issue of the 3rd inst, you re-
fer to an article from Hon. Thos. E.
Watson, which you contemplate print
ing. after which we infer you mean
that socialism will be corpse. But
both yourself and Mr. Watson will
find it to be the Invest corpse you ever
attended the funeral Of,
You are entirely correct when you
say, in our discussions of socialism
we have only touched upon its outer
edges. We have discussed it only
from the ordinary, everyday stand
point, emitting any mention OF its
moral and religious features
If socialism can be shown to be
any more immoral, and any further
or even as far-from the teachings OF
Christ, as capitalism is, We want to be
shown it, You must not lose sight OF
the fact that the present (capitalisU
system is directly responsible for all
the present evils in our social life.
The socialist movement is responsible
for some of the reforms and reliefs
from the crying evils of the day. AIr.
Watson is not a socialist, denies be-
ing a republican, and has been accus-
ed of not being a democrat-the pop
ulist party is dead. 1t would appear
that he belongs to the Watsonians.
The socialist party advocates the
common ownership of all of the pro-
duction of wealth, democraticany
managed. Through the common own
ership only can the producers receive
the full social value OF their toll Why
should one class be forced, by a sys-
TEN, TO work for and support another
class: while they treat all around
the world, give dog parties and mon
key dinners, costing thousands of dol
lars, while the children of the work
ers go in rags and tatters Just WHY
you think it would be irreligious and
immoral for the wives and children
Of the workers TO hold and use that
wealth for their own needs, rather
-han permit it to 60 into the Golfers
Of an idle class. to be used in such
manner, is not clear TO a thinker.
Socialism does not contemplate the
destruction Of any values or wealth,
only the kind that enables one class
10 live off another's toll
For instance, in 1909 there were
3G8,f91 manufacturing establishments
IN the United States, which gave en-
Dloyment during the year TO an aver
age of 7.67S,57S persons, of whom
5,615,0fG were wage earners. The
amount paid in wages during the year
was s., 427,03S,000, and in salaries,
$938,575,000 The value of products
Of these establishments was S20,G72.-
$4,000, and the amount paid for ma
.erials was $12,141,791, 900. The value
added by the process of manufacture
was $3.50, POI 900, about one-half of
which, or $4,365, 613, 900, went to wage
earners and other producers as wages
and salaries There was S1,945, $40
300 charged up as miscellaneous ex-
penses, leaving a balance of $2,21S.-
972.000 which went to the idlers as
net profit. This is the surplus value
that socialists would eliminate.
These figures are from the Bulletin
Of Manufacturers, census 1910, and
that can be done, which the present
system proves, only through the com
mon ownership of the means of pro
ducing that wealth. Whoever owns
the lands and other tools with which
wealth is created, virtually owns
those who must use those tools, or
means Of producing wealth. The more
cooperation in ownership the more
free the users.
W. C. CAIN.