' - ''Si;)!)^ nHh!,|l'; >i?j;);Mi;,f ;,;:;' v.^i- ;.!■;; 'ij;;,;): THE WAY OUT Has a Man a Right to Sell His Labor in the Open Market For Any Price He Pleases? NO. If He Does So, Does it Concern Anybody Besides Himself? YES. BY D. WILMOT SMITH "Don't read it. It is bad." — Republican Press. "It is a lie." — Democratic Press. "It is heresy." — Religious Press. "It is dangerous." — The Bench. DON'T WORRY, SMITH- ITS ALL RIGHT. z*xt.xo£s as3 oxiNra^s THE JAMES H. BARRY COMPANY D. WILMOT SMITH. THE WAY OUT Has a Man a Right to Sell His Labor in the Open Market For Any Price He Pleases? NO. If He Does So, Does it Concern Anybody Besides Himself? YES. BY D. WILMOT SMITH "Don't read it. It is bad." — Republican Press. "It is a lie." — Democratic Press. "It is heresy." — Religious Press. "It is dangerous." — The Bench. \r .jy- ' -'DON'T WORRY, SMITH- ITS i^ ALL "^ RIGHT." .^gg^^^^ THE JAMES H. BARRY ing him in order to protect itself. Respectfully submitted, D. WILMOT SMITH. San Francisco, Cal., August 4, 1904. THE WAY OUT. HAS A MAN A RIGHT TO SELL HIS LABOR IN THE OPEN MARKET FOR ANY PRICE HE PLEASES? IF HE DOES SO, DOES IT CONCERN ANYBODY BESIDES HIMSELF? Most people would say: "Certainly it is his right, and it is Qobody's business but his own." But do they say this because they know it, or because they have been raised to think so and because it has been the custom for every man to sell his labor for any price he pleased? It will not always do to uphold a thing because custom has sanctioned it, nor because everybody says it is right ; and this may be one of the things about which people have been and are mistaken. So far as I know, no one has ever thought to question it, nor has anyone gone down to the root of it and laid bare the foundation principles for us to look at on which it rests. Nor has anyone shown the relation, which the alleg- ed right bears to the welfare of society, as a reason for up- hold in g it. The most that has ever been said is the generai assertion that H is nght, and each generation has repeated it without any investigation to see if it was well founded, but simply because others said so. The reader will remember that history tells us the peo- ple at one time thought the earth was fiat and had four cor- ners. They were so sure of it that when Giordano Bruno in- vestigated the truth of the prevailing belief and told them it was not true; that the earth was round and had no corners at all, they got so excited and angry that they would not let him live and teach such stuff, so they chained him to a stake and burnt him to death. I do not fancy anybody would want to burn me at the stake for disputing the right of any man to sell his labor for any price he pleases, although I expect to get pretty well ''roasted" by certain newspapers for doing so. I do not take a contrary view of this question because I wish to quarrel with anybody, nor because I wish notoriety, nor because I wish to make money out of it. I take it be- cause after investigating the labor troubles that have been constantly agitating the country, I think I see where the root 10 THE WAY OUT. of all the mischief is, and wish to point it out, so men in au- thority can find it and then get out their legislative and judi- cial axes and go and cut it off. I realize I am tackling the prejudices of a great many people, but if that root is where I say it is, and I shall hope to give reason sufficient to prove it, then it is my duty to speak, no matter what anybody or any number of them may say. Now, to get a good, fair, square start, and no misunder- standing, you say ' ' a man has a right to sell his labor for any price he pleases, ' ' and I say, ' ' He has no such right. ' ' Again, you say: "It concerns nobody but himself," and I say: "It concerns ever^^body as well as himself." The right answer to the first proposition must depend upon which is the right answer to the second proposition ; for if it does not concern anybody besides himself, then you are right in saying: "It is his right to sell his labor for any price he pleases." If, on the other hand, as I say: "It concerns eveiwbody as well as himself," then, as a matter of course others, being in- terested, have the right to have something to say as to what price he shall sell his labor for, and if thei/ have that right, it follows that he does not have it. Is that true or not ? The question now is, icho are concerned in the price a man sells his labor for, and how are they concerned 1 I have said everybody is concerned, and if that is so they naturally ought to know and ought to want to know why, how, and all about it. In discussing the rights of those who sell their labor and how the exercise of their privilege to do so concerns others and the relations that exist between employer and employee. I do not propose to rely upon any goody-goody rot to sustain my case. I shall take the ground right from the start that, under the present system of getting a living, no man has been, is, or will be strictly honest or just in dealing with other men, except through fear. Not all fear the same thing, but all fear something. With some it is public opinion, with others the law, and others hell. I shall insist that Force is the only power that can be relied upon to stop men from taking ad- vantage of each other when they get a chance. Oppression, lying, cheating and stealing are born of either selfishness or necessity. Destroy these and such things will not be heard of. Force-law is the only thing that will do it. Law can make a selfish act unprofitable and when it be- comes unprofitable nobodj'^ will be selfish, and when no one is selfish, necessity will be destroyed. Law is force, and the object of law is to force people to do right, who will not do right without it. It don't coax, it commands; and as there is no wrong without a remedy, it follows that, if selfishness that injures another is wrong, there is a way to stop it. THE WAY (UIT. 11 Can you think? If so, do it. Do not take what I say or Avhat anyone says. Pick out what is not true. Read 1 Think ! Form your own opinion. Do not "believe." Get a conviction. There is force in a conviction, in a belief, there is none. Rich or poor, it is all the same, if you eat you are interested; if you do not, you are not. Now, the fact that everybody has alA'^^ays conceded the right of everybody else to sell his labor for any price that pleased him, shows on its face that nobody considered it concerned him personally; and, as nobody was personally concerned, nobody cared whether another was properly or improperly paid. If he starved it was all right, if he made money it was all right. In one event he was pitied, in the other congratulated or envied, and all because they were ignorant of the relation that actually existed be- tween his thrift from receiving just wages, and their own. If, however, they had realized that when a man consent- ed to work for less than reasonahle wages he was not only wronging himself, but them, too, they would have felt differ- ently about it. They would have interferred and put a stop to it. But they did not realize it. Its effects came to them something like the tariff on imports, which people used to be told and believed was paid by the foreigner, who sold his goods in this country. They did not think deep enougli (strange as it may seem) to see that the foreigner added the duty to the selling price, and when they purchased his goods they refunded to him the suras he had paid as duties. And so with wages; when an employer got help for less than reasonable wages, others could not see that to the extent he underpaid his help he kept in his pocket money which, if he had been just, would have improved the conditions of those he hired by going to them and then into general circu- lation, thus helping all others and preser^dng a more just dis- triburion of wealth. The present effect of those things was small, insidious and imperceptible. It came— like the tariff ■ — in such a round-about far-off way that they did not notice it. nor did they hold up their heads and take a long look ahead to see its effect on the future, if left go on. Perhaps, how- ever, each thought: "Oh! I will be dead by that time," and if he realized the wrong, consoled his conscience with the re- flection that evereybody was doing the same thing, besides it M^as not made a criminal offense to get the best of the hired man, and if it was a moral offense, each excused the other because all were perfectly willing to be guilty of it when con- ditions favored. "Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof" seemed to fit their case, so, when they got a chance to make a dollar by) getting work done cheaper than they could if they had been just to the man who did it, no one was disposed tO' let the op-« portunity pass; he seized it. The accumulated effects of 12 THE WAY OUT. this perpetual unjust practice, when looked at a hundred years ahead could not be anticipated probably at that time. They likely never dreamed the little that men could save or make off of hired help, could grow into such great fortunes^ as Ave see to-day. They little dreamed that the little insignifi- cant sums in wages they wronged the hired man out of could be the means of so much mischief, or that they had launched a system that contained the germ and secret of the enormous Trusts and Monopolies of the present. But it was true, nevertjieless. Every dollar that is invested in all the railroads, street- car lines, telegraph and telephone lines, ships and steamers, canals, big mills, factories, mines, buildings and machinery en earth, came from Profits on the Hired Man's labor; thati is, they repreesnt the total wages he earned and should hav^ received, but did not get. THE WAY OUT. 13 CUSTOM CANNOT MAKE WRONG RIGHT. A MIND THAT HAS STOPPED GROWING NEVER INVESTIGATES. Men have so long been accustomed to selling their labor for any price they pleased, and other men have so long been accustomed to buying it without interference, that all have come to blindly accept those privileges as fundamental rights, not to be questioned. It is strange how readily we accept some things as true and right, without proving them, just because others have so regarded them; but it is stranger still that, when some one points out why they are false and wrong, we turn away and: refuse to listen or to investigate. Such actions cannot be the result of conservative thought, for a conservative person is one who investigates the new as well as the old but honestly doubts, and therefore refuses to change. They cannot be the result of a lack of desire on the part of the people to know a truth that would better their condition, for surely all would be glad to see that done if they only knew a way. I can account for them on no ground except selfishness and stupidity, and no one will plead guilty to either of these. Wherever it is, I fancy the con- servative, the selfish, the stupid and all others will agree that, every generation has stumbled over many simple truths and never noticed them, and because it did not, kept right on in the old way, making the conditions of life harder and harder, when each might have made them easier and easier and left a legacy of better conditions to the next one instead of some they did. That because of their failure to recognize or refusal to be governed by truths that underlaid and were absolutely es- sential to the welfare of society, this generation is several centuries behind in social progress, what it should be. Whether people see it or not, the questions asked at the beginning of this book, involve principles of human conduct which underlie and are essential to the Avelfare of society; and if this generation shall be too blind, stupid or selfish to- discover them and act on them, it will not only make the conditions of life harder for itself, but it will, in its turn, leave to the next, conditions more oppressive than any here- tofore left to any generation. I do not expect those who already know it all, to read what I write. The minds of those who "know," have got their growth, and a mind that has stopped growing has quit investigating. Nor do I expect those who are mean enough to want to get ahead by underpaying or overworking their hired men to 14 THE WAY OUT. read me or agree with me. They are satisfied with things as they are. They do not want the pesent system disturbed or criticised. It upholds them in robbing the hired man out of part of the money he honestly earns and should receive, as just wages for his labor. There are two closses of people, who will read this and be interested in it. First. Those who work for wages ; and Second. Those who do not, but are great enough to feel interested in the welfare of those who do, and want to see them fairly paid. The first class will be interested, because it concerns their bread and butter, their health, happiness and life. The second class, because of their love of humanity and fair play and because they see in the constant wronging of tbose w'ho toil, the gradual destruction of those finer qualities of head and heart necessary to the development of a nobler race of men and women, instead of the improvement of them! to guid the Avorld along more safely and swiftly in the direc- tion of greater general security and happiness. The good, which these two classes wish to see accomplish- ed, is a Divine justification for their interest. The wa^ongs. which those who will take no interest wish to perpetuate, are a devilish justification for their lack of in- terest. The latter will contend, of course, that they do not seek to perpetuate any ^ATongs, and wall rely upon the great length of time it has been the custom to: hire men in the open market at the lowest price, regardless of fairness, to support their selfish contentions ; but they forget that custom can never make a wrong right, no matter how ancient it is. THP] WAY OUT. 15 THE BEGINNING OF THE CUSTOM. Away back, when, population was scarce and a large part of the world remained to be occupied and cultivated; before large portions of it were even discovered; when unknown islands and continents were still awaiting the coming of men and women to people them, make homes, build cities and found nations; before there were, anywhere, great farms, factories, mills, mines, stores or ships, and all industries were carried on on a small scale; before the days of machiner5^ when all things were made by hand; when the ways of life were sim-i pie and the things required to make the simple people con- tented and happy were limited ; in those days people exchang- ed work or worked for each other as a matter of accommoda- tion ; or because they did not care to work for themselves, or} to get a little start before going into business for them-^ selves. If wages were asked or paid, they were necessarily what would be equal, at least, to the value of the services of thei person, if w^orking for himself, or sufficient to attract him to work 'for others instead of for himself. The reasons for that state in regard to wages lay in the fact that a great, free unclaimed world was lying before men, presenting vast and various opportunities for individual ad- venture, effort and enterprise that always promised to reward them with abundant supplies for individual w^ants. There was no such thing as competing with each other to get the same job of work, except, perhaps, among those who lacked the push to strike out for themselves; and as that was before the birth of greed and great fortunes, no one needed very much money to begin business for himlself. Every man's hands, with his small kit of tools, was a factory. Every cross-road, with its poorly-equipped shops where things were made or repaired, was a commercial center. True, there was competition, but it was not the competi- tion of capital. The small capital required to do business was within the reach of all, and no man was forced out of business by his neighbor by the power of money. Competitors relied for success upon their superior skill as workmen, their fair dealing, prompt attention to business, obliging manners and general honesty. So I say, at one time, when no country was so thickly populated and land was abundant ; when the methods of doing things were crude and work plentiful, it was impossible for laboring men to crowd each other; and, not being crowded, there was nothing to force them to think of the fundamental principle affecting their welfare and the welfare of society'', fo* which I am now contending, namely, "No man has a right 16 THE WAY OUT. to sell his labor for any price he pleases," and not being forced to think of it, no body thought of it. The conditions necessary to make them think had not yet developed. The time had to come when machinery was taking the place of hands and fingers, as it does to-day ; when the vacant 'lands were all occupied, as they are to-day; when the ma- chinery, tools, factories, mills, mines and lands were all own- ed by a FEW, as they are to-day ; when there were so many^ to do the work that they must compete with each other for places and be forced by necessity to agree to work for less than enough to properly live in order to get them, as they are doing to-day ; when many could get no work at any price and were starving as they are to-day; when men were being driven from home and State by militia and corporation hire- lings as they are to-day in Colorado. Those were the condi- tions that were necessary to make men stop and think, and now that they are here, they are thinking. A necessity has arisen; it is a necessity for something to eat in many cases and in others something better to eat; for clothes, shelter and other things that make life fairly comfort- able and enjoyable; and to procure these, work is necessary and at wages that will buy them, and neither is obtainable. This is not exaggerated, although I wish it was; it is true, awfully true. Interview laboring men in every class, and they will nearly all tell of a fruitless hunt for work and of wages insufficient to support a family. These are the forces at work that set men to thinking, and that will always do it when everything else has failed. Deprive them of the necessaries of life, or make them work hard and then not be able to get half enough, although they see plenty all about them, and they are liable to get to think- ing something is wrong and begin to wonder what it is and try to locate it. That is what they are doing now. They know they are in trouble about work and wages, and that trouble is always the result of a wrong somewhere, and un- less they take pains to hunt it up they will never know the remedy. For years political parties have told them to look, first this way and then that : to do this, then that, and they would surely see the "WTongs that beset them and the way to right them. But it was not true: the wrongs grew worse and worse, and the ways of righting them less and less apparent. It was all a lie. Work has steadily become scarcer relative? to the number of men who want to do it, and wages are no- better. Laboring men continue to fight each other over getting the vacant places, and with their employes over securing more favorable terms. Many of them, in their bewilderment, have even located THE WAY OUT. 17 their grievances at the door of genius and wished to destroy the machinery that displaced them. But for every wrong, there is an adequate cause, and must be an adequate remedy; some time they will discoveil both, and then, let those responsible for their miseries stand from under. The fact that troubles have existed and do exist between the hirer and the hired is all the proof needed that wrongs have existed and do exist. Were there no wTongs, there would be no troubles. Employers and employees would be getting on smoothly together; there would be no strikes, lock-outs or boycotts; everything would be harmonious and peaceful and everybody prosperous, satisfied and happy. The thing is, therefore, to discover the cause of the wrong and to right it. The wrong certainly exists and it is certain that it had a beginning. If we take the United States from the time of the Col- onies, and consider what has been the rule as to wages from that time to the present, we shall discover the mistake made in this country that has necessarily led to all the troubles that have occurred over wages, and hours consituting a day's work; and if we do, the same discovery will apply to the same troubles all over the world. We shall at the same time discover the course, which, if it had been pursued, would have minimized those troubles and settled such as arose, in a legal and satisfactory way. The concentration of capital for the economical conduct of the business of the country, would not, as it has done, have' necessitated the organization of hired men to protect them- selves against the greed of the capitalist. The hired man would have always had a constant friend in the law and courts, which would have guarded his rights and done justice, and the whole country would have felt the benefit of the right way. I ' 18 THE WAY OUT. AVASTED EFFORT AND TH'E COMPETITIVE SYSTEM. xVn assault upon the competitive system is not the object of this book, so the defendei^s of the system need not quit reading: on that account; nor is the reform I advocate bas:ed upon the destruction of that system; on the contrary, it nat- urally goes with it, and the continuation of the system is what furnishes the reason for this reform to accompany it, wliile it lasts, for the protection of hired men. However, I find it necessaiy to have somethins: to say of it, in order to make clear what I wish to say of those who; cry peace! peace! to men str^^o:glino: for a living and gain, when there is and can be no such thing as peace in the in- dustrial world under the system. Personally. I abominate competition as a curse to the welfare of the world, so da not look for me to speak very kindly of it; but remember, it is the system itself I condemn,, not you who think it a good thing. Even if you are mis- taken, you are not to be censured; you are to be given credit for honest convictions, whatever they may be, and in time there if^ hope that we will both get right and agree. Religionists, sentimentalists and other Avell-meaniag peo- ple may preach, exhort and lecture until doomsday, to get men who are in business for profits, to observe the golden rule, "do unto others as you would have others do unto you." But their efforts are wasted — absolutely wasted; because no matter how much people would gladly follow the advice, the competitive system compels them, for self-proteelion, to dis- regard it, and they will disregard it. Nobody will knowing- ly do that which will hasten his own destruction. They should realize that we have been, and still are, liv- ing and working under the destructive and murderous com- petitive system; that our laws always have and still do rec- ognize that system as right and proper, and most of our peo-, pie frown upon every effort to abolish it. They are so set and prejudiced in its favor that they will not have it, if there is any other or better way, although they know it is a "dog-eat-dog" system, and all have suffered by it. They know its motto is for everybody to cinch everybody else, and its command is "gobble all you can; all in sight or out of sight; spare no one; get ahead: look out for yourself, first, last and all the time; success is the only thing that counts, no matter how you get it. ' ' Success is respected, honored and bowed to and no ques- tions asked ; even the preachers get on their knees to it. Everybody knows that competition encourages and fosters every manner of trick, deception and dishonest practice, yet everybody upholds it and says it is right. THE AVAY OUT. 19 AND THE LAW! Although its courts are constantly oc- cupied in unravellini? the tangles and solving the troubles competition gets people into, and in determining the guiit or innocence of some over-zealous person Mho has too openly robbed somebody, solemnly approves of it as a fundamental principle of human conduct, necessary to the wellfare of man- kind. It says it is right, then sits in judgment on some poor devil it has driven insane. It says it is right, then builds soup houses to feed those it has robbed. It says it is right, then buys poor-farms to care for its victims until they die. It says it is right, then erects a gallows to hang some one it has driven first to steal, then to murder. It builds school houses to teach young children to be good and make good citizens, and when grown, turns them loose and tells them to get a living by rustling and getting the best of each other whenever they can. It tells every man to make use of competition to do all the deviltry he can so long as he keeps out of jail "by the skin of his teeth" or otherwise. In short, the law by unholding competition keeps lighting a fire with one hand and endeavoring to extinguish it with the other before it has done damage. The truth is that, if HELL is a condition where people get no peace, then COIMPETITION is hell, and it is respon- sible for the conditions which Rev. C. N. Howard, of Roches- ter, N. Y., says exist as follows : "Wliile the population of the country has increased three times, the crime in the country has increased twelve times. The United States is paying more for the support of criminal institutions than for both religion and education. In ad- dition there is the expense of protecting people from the at- tacks of criminals without the jails." Now, so long as the law, by unholding competition, re- wards people who take advantage of others, that is, permits them to keep all they can get by fighting each other in every industrial walk of life; is it of any use to preach to them or lecture them and tell them they should not do so? It is manifestly nonsense, and every sensible person ought to know it. President Roosevelt stood with both feet on the very bottom foundation principles every nation must rest upon in order to be happy, prosperous and strong, when he said, in his speech at the State Fair in Syracuse, N. Y., September 7th, 1903 : "It is all essential to the continuance of our healthy na- tional life that we should recognize this community of in- terests among our people. The wellfare of each of us is de- pendent fundamentally upon the wellfare of all of us. * * 20 THE WAY OUT. We must act upon the motto of all for each and each for all. ' ' In this speech he had reference to labor and capital. The trouble with the president's advice "was that he did not saji how such a condition could be brought about. Does he think people will "act upon the motto of all for each and each for all" or that "community of interest" is possible so long as the law recognizes competition as the right thing? He certainly knows they will not and that it is not; and why so smart a man, who himself has, time and again, in his speeches (and he does in this same speech) endorse the com- petitive system, should advocate two courses of conduct for the people to live by that are so opposite and inconsistent with each other, is not easy to account for. President Roosevelt is generally recognized by all classes as an able and incorruptible man. People generally would resent the imputation that he Avould resort to tricks of speech to fool them even if his life was at stake. Then why is it that he stands by competition as right, and at the same time tells the people "we should recognize this community of interest among the people." "We must act upon the motto of all for each and each for all?" If he fully understands the significance of the ''all for each and each for all" motto or the "community of interest" doctrine (both of which mean the same thing) he knows the present code of laws is not adapted to practicing them: then why, knowing it is impossible for people to act on his ad- vice, does he not say to them, "go and make laws that make these things possible. Change your constitution, if necessary, and leet us 'each have that wellfare that depends funda- mentally upon the wellfare of all.' " What are constitutions and laws for if not to guard th^ wellfare of the people? Do we look, or have we ever looked to anything but law to consei've our rights and stamp out wrong 1 Do we expect people to do right just because the presi- dent, or someone else tells them they should? No! We know they will not. We know if they are told they should do this or should not do that, they will ask: "What is the law?" And if there is no law, they consider it is proper for them to do it or not as they see fit, and their actions are always gov- erned by their personal interests as they see them. If men will do right Avithout law, then why have we laws? We know laws are necessary ; that they will not do right with- out them, so we make laws to compel them to. Hence if any- thing is wrong that the law don't reach, let us make a law that will reach it and stop this foolishness of asking people to "please be good." It is all right to cultivate in men a desire to do right purely for the love of right, but at the present stage of human development and methods of getting a living, if we want to feel certain they will do right, we must make a law relative to the matter and attach a penalty that they fear. All men THE WAY OUT. 21 do not fear sermons or hell, but all have great respect for sheriffs and prisons. So I say, those who are undertaking or hoping to bring about any substantial harmony or lasting peace between labor and capital, or between any set of men whose interests clash, by appealing to them to be humane, to be just, to be conscien- scious, to be good, honorable and deal fairly, are simply under- taking and hoping for the impossible so long as these same men are compelled to fight each other for what they get in the field of competition. Nor is this true because all men lack honor, conscience and kind hearts ; it is true because it is the very nature of com- petition that every man must fight, and he can not make a successful fight unless he throws conscience and fair dealing to the dogs and goes in to win at any cost, even at the cost of his honor. It is either that or be crushed, and it is doubt- ful if even all those who advocate the conscience method of solving business differences could be relied on ( if money was at stake) to always follow the advice they are so willing to give others. Business men look upon the doctrine about being "your brother's keeper" as only meant for fools; and no matter what they profess on Sunday, they devote the six days fol- lowing to devising ways and means to circumvent their neigh- bor. If men M^ere free to choose, then appeals to the heart and conscience might have some effect to shape their daily con- duct; but no man is free whose living depends on competi- tion, and every man's living depends on it. Like Esau, he knows every man's hand is against him, that uncompromising competitive business methods encompass him, and he is power- less to defy them without ruin to himself; so, with the ex- ception of an occasional feeble protest, all accept it as an existing condition from which there is no escape, and fight each other like dogs over a bone. "What for? To get, gei, get more than they have any use for. Is not such a condition shameful, disgraceful to a people layig claim to such high civilization? The Presiident evi- dently sees something amiss in the competitive system or why should he remind those who are competing to not lose sight of the motto, but "must act upon" it, of "all for each and each for all." (1) But whether he sees it or not, it is the chief cause of all the misery in the world to-day, and its inevitable consequences are to increase it so long as it is permitted to remain a lawful condition of society. Law cannot countenance competition and at the same time successfully counteract its natural effects. If it recognizes it, it must expect the consequences. If it abolishes it the misery it causes will cease. If it is a good thing let us quit criticising those who practice it with success. If it is a bad thing, let us knock it out. It cannot be knocked out wth sermons, it must be done with Force — LAW. THE WAY OUT. HOW THE DOCTRINE THAT IT IS A MAN'S RIGHT TO SELL HIS LABOR FOR ANY PRICE HE PLEASES, GOT INTO THE UNITED STATES. A NATURAL ERROR. Anyone can easily imagine that, in the United States, say a hundred years ago when substantially the whole population was confined to a narrow strip along the Atlantic Coast and the almost boundless "West offered every man a home and an easy living, it was the most natural thing in the world for people to fall into the error that it was right for eveiy man to sell his labor for any price that pleased him, because all knew that, if any man was dissatisfied Mith his job, wages or employer, he did not have to stay; he could go out West and! get a home of his own. The whole West was open to him. As to one man interfering with another by cutting wages, it did not amount to anything for the reason that there was so much public land to go and live upon, nobody cared or questioned another's right to cut wages, or his right to work for less than reasonable wages, or the right of his employer to hire him for less than reasonable wages. Nobody was af- fected. The unoccupied public lands and the new industries they fostered were always a vent and refuge for labor and the la- bor market was never overcrowded; employers were always obliged to pay reasonable wages to attract and keep the men they needed. These were the conditions and circumstances that moulded the minds of the people and laid the foundation in the United States for the inculcation, retention and adoption of the un- just and fallacious doctrine, that, "ii is every man's riglit to sell his labor in the open marliet for any price he pleases, and it is nohofly's business but his own." To the poeple of a hundred years ago the West seemed to be boundless and the quantity of public land unlimited; they could not imagine at the time when it would be all occupied and no longer a refuge for men who wished to escape from crowded centers; certainly they did not imagine it would be so soon and most of them thought never. Therefore, there was no cause for doubting or even suspecting the wisdom of the doctrine ; and if, as a matter of fact the West had been bound- less and the public lands unlimited, if rich valleys, great mountains, forests, mines, rivers and rolling plains had con- itnued on eternally, or if, as population increased and men required more land to enable them to escape oppressive condi- THE WAY OUT. 23 tions, God should have created it for them, then the doctrine that a man may sell his labor for any price he pleases could never had done any harm. The objection I make to it would not apply. But that was not the case. The West did have bounds, the public lands had limits and God had quit creating more. He made what there is and turned it oved to his children to man- age to suit themselves, and they have done it. Part of them have appropriated to themselves every quarter-section that is worth having and none is left for the rest or for those yet un- born. The same doctrine and rule as to one's right to sell his labor for any price he pleased had prevailed in the old coun- tries, and those who emigrated to this brought it with them instead of leaving it behind along with other iniquitous er- rors and oppressions from which they had fled and hoped to escape by coming here, and readily joined in helping to make it a part of our law. But in that matter, everybody, native and naturalized, had been educated to think the wrong way was right, and as the conditions of the new world were favorable to that view, and no- crisis occurring in the labor markets to make them suspect it was wrong or caused them to investigate to discover its ultimate disastrous effects, they just settled down to practic- ing and upholding the wrong way. Every circumstance and condition seemed to tend to ob- scure and keep back out of sight and thought the only doc- trine and rule that would have always worked, and that could have always been relied upon to settle saisfactorily to all con- cerned, the wage question, in one generation as well as anoth- er or in one country as well as another, and without regard to whether there Avas any more public lands to be settled or not. The trouble was the people in the early days were indus- trially so independent, they imagined all people would always be the same, or else they did not concern themselves very much about what degree of industrial independence others would enjoy; if they did, and could have looked ahead a hundred years and seen the great capitalist combinations of to-day arrayed against organi;^ed and unorganized hired men, on the single issue of reasonable wages; could they have seen rich, powerful and remorseless corporations making use of the very doctrine and rule which they helped to perpetuate as right, to despoil and oppress the class whose rights and in- terests the rule was supposed to safeguard; could they have seen them insisting on the rule because it enables them to make a profit off of the earnings of their underpaid hired men; seen them insisting that men wanting work shall be free to compete with each other as to wages to get it. not becaiLse they care for the wellfare of the men, but besause they want to go among them and take advantage of such 24 THE WAY OITT. competition to hire those who will work the most hours for the least pay, regardless of whether or not the hours or wages are reasnable, or will support them comfortably or decently, or whether the men they employ voluntarily accept the terms or do so from sheer want and necessity ; and insisting on their legal right to take that advantage ; could they have heard the President of the United States the great ( ?) statesman of the country, the press and courts all upholding and encouraging the conduct and contentions of these capitalists as fundamen- tal, just and lawful ; and on the other hand, could they have seen the Labor Unions standing solidly together and heroical- ly endeavoring to unite all hired men to resist such alleged rights to the extent of demanding for themselves reasonable hours and reasonable wages, and refusing to work unless their demands are conceded: could they have looked ahead and seen all these things, they certainly, in their great desire to make this country superior in every respect to every other on earth, and what they professed it was ('the land of the Free) would have rejected the old rule that it is every man's right to sell his labor for any price he pleases, and tried to dis- cover one that would not have placpd him, because broke and hungry, completely at the mercy of those who wouM take ad- vantage of his circumstances and refuse to hire him unless he agreed to work for little or nothing. They would have tried to devise some rule that would pro- tect every man and see that he got reasonable wages whether he was broke and hungry or not. They might have compelled by law every employer to recog- nize the fact that, the labor of a broken man or hungry man did not come any cheaper than that of a man who was not broke or hungry, and therefore in a position to demand rea- sonable wages or refuse to work. They never would have consented to the present pernicious rule which leaves every destitute man and his family with no law to protect him or them from the greed of human sharks ; they might have changed it so it would have said to every employer of labor "you shall pay every nmn you hire rea- sonuhle wages, no tnater xch ether he is hard up or not. Every man who earns his living by wages is entitled to be treated fairly and justly and you shall not take a mean advantage of him because he is poor and dependent or ignorant and you are rich, shrewd and independent." They would have said, "the State has some interest in these men's wellfare and will have something to say about such transactions. ' ' They might have established the general rule that: Wages shall in every case be reasonable, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding, to be determined at the instance of either party by a jury from the facts and circumstances of the case, including the cost to the hired of living properly and the ability of the hirer to pay. And they would have made it the law. Of course there are people now, who will be quick to jump THE WAY OUT. 25 up and exclaim, " Oh ! That would never do ; it would impair the oblig:ations of contracts and be unconstitutional ! " But if we were to investigate the habits of thought of most of these people, we would find that about the only thinking they have ever done, was confined to their own individual business or pleasure ; that so far as sitting down to investigate or meditate on the consequences to the country of pursuing a given policy, they never did or do, and the nearest they ever came to such a thing was, when they took an hour or_ two off to listen to a speech from some one who advocated their parti- cular prejudices, or to vote the ticket that represented their personal interests. As to being grounded in governmental principles or policies, they are as innocent of knowledge as children. AA^hen they say such a rule would impair the obligations of contracts, we might reasonably suspect that they have or hoped to have some interest in unjust contracts of that sort and are alarmed more for fear that such a rule might interfere with their own plans to exploit hired men, than from any deep seated anxiety they have for the sacredness of contracts or the general wellf are. However, I would say to them that, ' ' the obligtaions of an unjust contract ought to he impaired, other- wise we must say, it is wrong to do right." If to impair the obligations of an unjust contract would be to do something unconstitutional, then I would say further, "there must be something wrong with the constitution." LET US SUPPOSE A CASE. If one, being under age, wishes to be relieved from the ob- ligations of his contract, the courts will always interfere and declare it null and void. It will do the same if deception is used to get one to enter into an unfair contract, if, on learning of the deceit, he seeks to be relieved from it. It will do the same if, against his will one is forced to agree to do or not to do a particular thing. The principle on which the courts interfere and give relief in the first case is, ivant of capacity in the minor to contract. In the second case they interfere because, fraud was practic- ed to obtain consent to the conract, and. In the third case because, consent was wanting it was ob- tained through fear ; that is, he Avas deprived of his free will, of having any choice, of the privilege of consenting voluntar- ily or refusing; of the priviledge of exercising his discretion; his mind was imprisoned and had no alternative but to agree. Now, here are three different kinds of casesi in which the courts will always interfere, and the relief they give is the same in one as it is in the others. Let us now inquire and see if there is any difference in principle why relief should be given in those cases and not in the following. 26 THE WAY OliT. ANOTHER CASE. Here is a man needing food, clothes and shelter and must work and earn money in order to buy them. Here is another man who has sufficient food and clothing and a comfortable house to live in, and therefore, although he hires out to Keep himself supplied, does not have to sell his labor at present, but is ready and willing to do so whenever he is paid reason- able wages, which we will suppose is $2 per day. Here is another man who "wants some work done, and is able to pay reasonable wages to a man who will do it. He knows $2 per day is reasonable, and that he can afford to pay it, but he also knows that the first man is hard up and must have work, and that the second man is not, and will not work unless he gets $2 a day. So in the hope of driving a bargain witb the first man he goes to him and after parlying awhile offers $1 or no work, aud the man seeing it is $1 or nothing, agrees to it because he is in great need of the neces- saris of life. Of course if $2 a day is reasonable, $1 is barely enough to get the cheapest necessaries. Now, if, when the man comes to settle, he should say to his employer, "$1 is not enough, I have been barely able to live and have nothing saved, you should pay me the going wages which you knew when you hired me were $2 ; you knew when you came and offered me $1 and said I could not have the job unless I would agree to work for that, that I was destitute and hungry and had no choice but to accept your offer." His employer would laugh in his face and say, "no sir, and you have your gall with you to ask it. You made a fair, square bargain to work for a dollar and that is all I shall pay yon. You did have a choice and you know it. You choose to work- on my terms to going hungry. ' ' Then if the man should sue to recover $2 a day and allege and be able to prove that, "while he agreed to work for $1 a day he was forced to do so by reason of his utter poverty and destitution, and for no other reason, although $2 a day was the going and reasonable wages, all which was well kno"RTi to his employer when he offered $1 and refused to pay more, or to hire him unless he would agree to work for $1 and did so solely for the purpose of taking advantage of his destitu- tion, aud get his work done for less than it was reasonably worth, knowing he would have to accept and agree to work for $1 or beg or go hungrj'-; that the services rendered were reasonably worth $2 a day and the employer was well able to pay that sum, but refused to pay more than $1 which was tendered and refused. That $1 was barely sufficient to pur- chase the commonest necessaries of life from day to day while working for his employer and he was unable with the most THE WAY OUT. 27 pinching economy to purchase needed clothing for any meia- iDcr of his familj' or save any sum whatever after paying for his common necessities," and should ask judgment at the rate of $2 a day; and the employer should answer his com- plaint and admit the contract at $1 and every other allegation and ask for judgment on the pleadings for his costs, what do you suppose the court would do for the hired man? Would the Judge inquire into the facts alleged that forced him to agree to work for $1 instead of standing out for $2 ? Would he take into consideration the fact that he was destitute, that the going wages were $2, that his services were w^orth $2, and the employer was able to pay $2, and should have done it if he wished to be fair and do right ? Would he be influenced against the employer because he was stingy and selfish and took a mean advantage of a helpless man to make a dollar off his labor 1 Would he tell him he had no right to do it? Would he punish him for it and make him pay what he ought to have agreed to pay? Would the fact that the hired man had to spend, each day, all lie agreed to •work for ($1) to get enough to eat and was w^orse off after quitting work than before he began in the matter of clothing and everything with the exception that he and his family were kept alive during the time? No, he would consider none of those matters. Tie would make short work of the case by dismissing it and tellijig the hired man he had no cause of action and give judgment in favor of the employer for his costs. If he should feel like making any explanation to the hired man why he had no case, he would say something like this : DECISION. "In this case the court can take cognizance of nothing but the contract of hiring, the terms of which are admitted by both parties; and as it is also admitted that the employer* had done all he agreed to do, you had no ground on which to base this action or to recover. The obligations of every con- tract voluntarily entered into by competent parties, the law holds sacred and cannot be impaired unless fraud is alleged and proved. "The fact (which is admitted) that your 'utter poverty and destitution forced' you to make a contract to work for your employer at wages that were inadequate and unjust to your- self, is something the court is not permitted by the law to take any notice of. If, however, it had been alleged and proven that your employer knowingly did something to place you in the state of destitution you were in, and did it with the object, purpose and expectation of taking advantage of your destitu- tion to induce you to contract with him to work for inadequate and unjust wages, and by that means did induce you to con- tract with him to work for inadequate and unjust wages, and 28 THE WAY OUT. you rendered the services agreed on ; in that case, it is possible the court could, under the law, set the contract aside and give judgment against your employer for the reasonable value of your services. It is possible that such>a state of tarts would be held to amount to a fraud, or a conspiracy to dejiraud. "In this case there are no such allegations. It does not appear that your employer was in any way responsible for yonr condition. It only appears that he knew you were desti- tute and hungry, with no way to relieve your needs except to beg or agree to his offer of employment; and believing that, for these reasons, you would agree to work cheapsr than others, he made you an offer of work and certain wages and you accepted. Now, what your employer did the law gives him an absolute right to do. It gives every employer the same right ; that is, the right to hire men for as little as he can. He is under no legal obligation to agree to pay adequate or rea- sonahle wages. If the man hired is forced by want (no mat- ter hoAv serious it is) to agree to work for wages that are less than adequate or reasonable, it is his individual misfortune, one which the law takes no notice of even when invoked. Its policy is to leave him, and does leave him in such case, a vic- tim to be preyed on by all whose consciences are so hardened that they would, if they could, take his labor and pay him less than its value. "Right or wrong, such is the law and the duty of the court is to enforce the law as it finds it. The law contemplates that every man will look out for his own interests; and presumes until the contrary appears, that he is competent to do so. Those it regards as incompetent and in whose behalf it will interfere, are classified as minors and persons of unsound mind. It will also interfere, when moved to do so, in cases of force or fraud, when properly alleged. True, you have pleaded here a kind of force, but it is not the kind of force the law will relieve you from. The force the law contem- plates is the kind that puts one in fear, as threats of bodily harm. If one was forced to contract in that manner the court could give relief. In your case the force that induced you to agree was distress, which may or may not have been brousht on by your own conduct. You may have wasted your sub- stance in riotous living or you may have come to want from laziness; you may have speculated and failed or lost all by flood or fire or drought ; but Avhether one or all of these causes placed you in a position where you were forced to take any employment that came your way, the law does not concern itself. It still treats you as free to accept or refuse any wages offered and will not institute or countenance any in- quiry to show you are not free because of your destitution or that you acquiesced from necessity. "The law contemplates that you are ready and willing to get the best of every other man in your predicament if you can, and it would not interfere if you did so. On the other THE WAY OUT. 29 hand, it leaves you without pity or partiality to fight it out the best you can if some other man gets the best of you. If you can press the nose of another man to the grind-stone all his life, it is your right and privilege to do so, the law will not interfei-e; nor will it interfere if some other man holds your nose there. This, in that respect, is a free country. "Suppose ninety-nine out of every one hundred, or nine hundred and ninety out of every one thousand people in the State were reduced to the condition of want and distress you were in, and the other ten in every thousand were able to em- ploy them and should say to the nine hundred and ninety, ' we will employ you and give you each fifty cents a day if you will agree to work for that and board yourself,' and the nine hundred and ninety had no other offer or hope but to agree to it to prevent starvation, and therefore agreed. There is no law in any State in the United States that would permit any court to break the contract. On the other hand the law of every State would compel every court to enforce it, and the nine hundred and ninety would be held to it and not per- mitted to recover an extra cent, no matter how poor they were or how unjustly lo-\v the wages were, or how rich the ten men w^e're ; and if the nine hundred and ninety should think the law and the decision of the court unreasonable and unjust, and should become obstreperous and say, Sve will not stand it, W' e will have more anyway, ' and should proceed to help them- selves from the abundant stores of the ten employers, one or all of the ten could call on the sheriff and he and all his dep- uties would, by command of the same law. have to go and stop them; and if they were not strong enough to do it, the sherilA* would be obliged to swear in more deputies, and if they could not do it, the ten, or any one of the ten, employers Aveuld have the right to -have the governor call cut the militia. "The laws of this country are founded upon thewholesome, necessary and patriotic fundamental principle that all men must be and are, Free to contract. "It makes no allowance for the unfortunate and onerous conditions on which you seek to get the court 's interference. "It makes no allowance for the conditions that lead up to those onerous conditions, such as, lack of opportunity to earn. "It is however a familiar principle of the law that, where no agreement was made as to wages, and the court is appealed to to decide, it will hear evidence and give reasonable wa^es. "The difficulty in your case, and in the cases of the nine hundred and ninety men instanced was, that you all had an agreement. "There are other conditions the law makes no allowance for. It makes no allowance for a condition of scarcity of work, which places laboring men at the mercy of e.iai loyers in the matter of wages ; nor does it make any allowance for a ocndilion of scarcity of laborers which places employers at the mercy of laboring men in the matter of wages demanded. 30 THE WAY OUT. "These conditions the law leaves to be adjusted by what is called supply and demand ; and whether the supply is great- er or less than the demand, it is all the same so far as law is concerned, which always looks on with cold indilierence. "It may see men willing to work, and starving because there is not enough demand for their labor. It may see property going to waste or ruin, because there are not men enough to be had to care for it or they refuse to work ; great suffering in one case and great loss in the other ; yet, for such conditions, it says not a word. They are left to chance; and, while it is not the business of the Bench to cast reflections on the wisdom of the age that neglects to substitute law for chance, where it is possible, I cannot refrain from remarking the fact, apparent to all, that the country suffers from partial distress all the time, and general distress (called panics) periodically, which appears to be the result of leaving the ad- justment of these important matters to the uncertain state of supply and demand. It is possible that you are a victim of one of those conditions which supply and demand is supposed to regulate, and if so, your troubles are outside of the province of the law, or the assistance of the courts. "The case is dismissed and defendant will take judgment for his costs." THE WAY OUT. 81 WHAT DO YOU THINK OF IT? Now that the court has decided this case against the hired man, and given as its reason for having done so that, under the law as it now stands, it could not interfere to help him, I wish to ask the reader a question : What is your opinion of the law? This man's agreement to work for one dollar was, apparent- ly a voluntary one, but truly, was it? Did he agree because the offer was fair, or because he had to? If he had to, how can the law or any court, or any one say it was voluntarj^? If it was not voluntary, it must have been the opposite, which is involuntary, that is Force. If he could have exercised his discretion when the employer offered him $1, when he should have offered $2, what do you think ho would have done? What would you have done? He would have refused and you would have done the same. What made him! agree to work for half wages? Hunger. Suppose now his employer had gone to you and asked you to agree to work for him for half wages and you did not need money bad enough to make it necessary for you to do so and should say "No." Suppose he should then stick a loaded revolver in your face and say, "Now, damn you, if you don't agree to work for me for $1 a day, I will kill you right here!" What would you do? If you thought he had the drop on you, and meant what he said, you would do just what every other prudent man would do under the circum- stances. You Avould agree to work for him for a dollar a day. If then, he should saj^, "alright, go on now and go to work!" and with his revolver should stand guard over you while you worked, and when you had finished should offer you a dollar a day for the time yon worked, and you should re- fuse it and demand $2 and he would not give it, and you should sue him, and he should set up your contract for $1 and you should show that the contract was made at the point of a revolver, and that the labor was done at the point of a revolver, and that $2 a day was reasonable. What would the court do? Why, it would asy, "the contract was null and void" because made under duress and would allow you $2 a day without any hesitation whatever. Now what forced you to agree and then to work for $1. A revolver. What forced the hired man to agree and then to work for $1 ? Hunger. Why did you agree? To save your life. Why did he agree? To save his life. Is there any difference? No, but the courts have made one. Why? Don't know. Can the court tell ? No, it follows a precedent. •3:1 THE WAY OUT. What is a precedent! It is a mistake some other court made. Suppose the hired man had refused to work for $1 there being no other show for him to get work? Why, he would have had to beg or starve and go naiied. Suppose he had chosen to beg and go naked? Then the man that offered him $1 (or anybody else) could have had him put in jail as a vagrant, or for indecent ex- posure, or both, so his only choice w^as, in effect (because of course he would not choose to starve) work for one dollar or go to jail ! How many men to-day are working for less than reasonable wages under the same forced conditions as that hired man? Here is a sample of them. Read what Cardinal Gibbons says: Baltimore. December 6, 1903 — "Wlien the employer be- comes suddenly rich, while the toiler, with the utmost thrift and economy, can scarcely keep the wolf from the door, there is something really wrong in our social and economic con- dition," declared Cardinal Gibbons in his sermon to-dav at the Cathedral, in which he condemned "sweat-shops" and ap- pealed to his auditors to discriminate in making purchases in favor of employers who treat their employees with justice and charity. He recommended the charitable work for op- pressed toilers conducted by the consumers' league. The text for the sermon was "Am I My Brother's Keeper?" "There is a class of persons in Baltimore who are employ- ed by proprietors of large clothing establishments," contintt- ed his Eminence. "Some of the workers are employed in the stores, others make garments in their oAvn homes and bring them to the establishments. ]\Tany of these men and women are compelled to toil in "sweat shops," of which there are eighteen in one section of the city, contracted in space and poorly lighted and ventilated. They are overworked and un- derpaid. "In a careful investigation I have discovered that after laboring for six days at ten or twelve hours a day, their week- ly compensation amounts to $6 or $8, and with this pittance they have to pay for house rent, food and clothing and other expenses. They are living on starving wages; the result is that in a few years they become incapacitated for work. THE AVAY OUT. 33 "THEY DEMAND FAIR WAGES." "These toilers ask for no alms. All they demand is living v/aofes. They appeal to yoii and the public for compensation and consideration. They are our own flesh and blood. "You will ask, hoAv can we help them? How can we re- dress their grievances? You may not be able to aid them directly, but you can do so indirectly in various ways. "You can agitate the question. By agitating, the air is stirred, the sky is cleared. You arouse public attention to a pressing grievance.; you invoke a sympathy; you remove the veil, so that one-half of the Avorld can see how the other half lives. "Thank God, there are in Baltimore some clothing houses that treat their employees with justice and charity. In mak- ing purchases you can discriminate in favor of these establish- ments. You will thus exercise a moral pressure on the op- pressors by appealing to their self-interest." How many more are refusing to be forced by these con- ditions, and tramping and begging, and how many more arc suffering the penalty of their refusal, in jails, charged with vagrancy ? You who have observed or had experience may answer to suit yourselves, and what but the lack of law is responsible for this state of things 1 Do you agree or disagree with Rev. Thomas B. Gregory, who Mrites in the Examiner (S. F.) of August 9, 1903, when he says: "Human necessity is more sacred than any institution, or law, or theory. In the presence of such a necessity the holiest things must take a back track. As against the real hunger of a human being, shew-bread and the Sabbath have no rights that we are bound to respect. The holiest is man, and all the other holy things— Church, Sunday, State la^v■ — ■ are man's servants, not his masters; are the chariots which are to carry man along the way of victory, not the jugger- nauts which are to crush him." Is that good sense, or is it nonsense? ''Hnynan necessity is more sacred than any institution or law," he says; but our law does not say so. AVhat does our law say? As interpreted by the courts, it says: "A little contemptible contract, miade by a hired man under conditions of necessity, is more sacred than the neces- sities of the man or his family, although their lives be in- volved. ' ' Think of it! Holding a contract sacred that was entered into through necessity. If such a contract is sacred, it is a sacred swindle. 34 THE WAY OUT. There are thousands, yes. tens of thousands of men, Avomen and children working to-day for a mere pittance under just such contracts, that is. contracts they were forced to enter into to get enought to keep them from starving, and there is no law to interfere. Does the laV suppose a man who knows his wife and little children are suffering from cold or hunger, or lack of clothes, is going to stop and deliberate on the terms of a contract before deciding on whether or not he will go to work and supply them? If they were in the upper story of a burning building and could only be rescued by a ladder that somebody else o^vned, would he wait to get the owner's permission before using it? If they were being carried down by a flood, would he hunt the owner of a nearby boat before taking it? "What good would it do him am^-ay to deliberate on the wages offered? He could not refuse, no matter what they were, if they promised some relief. Think of the law dignifying the agreement of a hungry man to work, as a contract, one it must hold to be sacred and binding. Has not this man suffered enough with anxiety before he got a job ; waiting, hoping, tramping and asking for work and being refused? And now, after he has it, is the law going to further add to his miseries by standing in \vith his employer and help him to beat him out of fair wages on the flimsy plea that he made a contract ?• Instead, it should encourage him and say, "My man, you were willing to work; you rustled for it; you got it and my business as Law is. to see that you are properly paid. I am your friend, whether you have another on earth or not. Your employer informs me he made a con- tract with you as to wages. Don't let that trouble you in the least. I will look into all the facts. If I find the wages specified are just, I will hold you to the contract, but if I find they are not, I will fix them at what I consider just, and will see that he pays -them. No one shall make a tool of me to help rob you." (Note — Eead "How to Stop Strikes," etc., page ) Don't you think the hired man would be happy if the law talked that way ? And would not employers scowl and growl because it had ceased its partiality to them? Had the law always talked that way, would here have been occasion for labor unions? Would there have been occasion ' for ex-President Grover Cleveland to criticize and warn em- ployers as he did in his address at the annual banquet of the Commercial Club in the Auditorium Hotel, Chicago, 111., October 14th, 1903, when he said on the subject of AMERICAN GOOD CITIZENSHIP: "We are told that the national splendor we have built THE WAY OUT. 35 upon the showy ventures of speculative wealth is a badge of our success. Unsharinp; contentment is enjoined upon the mass of our people, and they are invited, in the bare sub- sistence of their scanty homes, to patriotically rejoice in their country's prosperity, "This is too unsubstantial an enjoyment of benefits to sat- isfy those who have been taught American equality; and thus has arisen, by a perfectly natural process, a dissatisfied insistence upon a better distribution of the results of our vaunted prosperity. We now see its worst manifestation in the apparently incorrigible dislocation of the proper rela- tions between labor and capital. "This, of itself, is sufficiently distressing; but thoughtful men are not without dread of sadder developments yet to come." Mr. Cleveland is smart enough to see a storm coming, and is frank enough to admit it and tell what is bringing it on: "The bare subsistance of their scanty homes," and "too unsubstantial an enjoyment of benefits to satisfy." Whom? Hired men, of course. He means to tell his rich listeners of that club that the hired men are not getting a fair share of the country's "vaunted prosperity," that is, enough tvages in proportion to what they get; that the em- ployers are too greedy and take too large a percentage of what their hired men produce; that the hired men have found it out, and are making a fuss about it, and will con- tinue to make a fuss, and that they had better be looking out, because there Avill be "sadder developments" yet. The point made in Mr. Cleveland's address is that hired men are not fairly paid. This is the admission of a capital- ist to capitalists accompanied by a warning. He fails to give them anv advice how to avert the "sadder develop- ments;" w'hether to pay more wages or to organize and fight or otherwise. He only says, by way of warning, "look out, its coming ! ' ' As a smart man talking to smart men, he could not in- dulge in sentimental gush as President Roosevelt often does when talking to the galleries, the common people. He could not say, "Now. you business gentlemen, ought first to learn to be good. You ought to learn that 'honesty is the best policy;' you ought to pay your hired men fair wages. You should remember, as Mr. Roosevelt says, that Sve must act upon the motto of all for each, and each for all; that the welfare of each of us is dependent fundamentally upon the the welfare of all of us.' You Imow, as he further says, *we- must see that each is uiiven a square deal, because he is en- titled to no more and should receive no less' (Roosevelt at State Fair, New York, September 7th, 1903). Those are the principles you business men should do business on, so I say to you again, you ought to be good, and, as Mr. Roose- velt also says, 'I have the right to challenge the best effort 36 THE WAY OUT. of every American v.-orthy of the name in putting down ly evevy means in his power corruption in private life.' " (Roosevelt at New York Avenue Presbyterian Church Cen- tennial, November 16th, 1903.) Mr. Cleveland could not talk in that strain to his audience of business men. but no doubt, the audience of common people that heard President Koosevelt talk in that way yelled themselves hoarse with pat- riotic ardor, Avhen, if he had talked so to the Commercial Club Mr. Cleveland talked to, he would have been laughed at as soon as his back was turned. The difference in the complexion of the different audiences accounts for the differences of utterance. Mr. Cleveland was adressing men of business, who were in business solely for gain and he was too shrewd to say, "Gentlemen, in business, you must act upon the motto of 'all for each and each for all.' In business, you must see that everybody has a 'square deal.' " But tlie President was talking to a different crowd; he could and did. One audience was composed of men engaged in intense com- mercial competition, and every man was skilled in and daily practiced all the refined and unrefined known methods of skinning everybody, to score success; and, to have told them, as a matter of business, to not skin their hired men, would have fallen flat, decidedly flat. Prasident Eoosevelt's audience was composed of competi- tive people also, but their methods of competing had not been keyed up to the high-straining tension of the methods prac- ticed by Mr. Cleveland's audience, so it was too dull to de- tect any conflict between its daily business life and the Pres- ident's sentimentalisms and innocently applauded what, ac- cording to its interests and practices (for each, in a small way, was always trying to get the best of the other), it should have hissed. Had President Roosevelt talked the same way to ^Ir. Cleveland's audience, it might not have hissed him, out of respect for his high office, but it certainly would have thought hisses. AVHAT PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT AND MR. CLEVE- LAND, IN ALL CANDOR, SHOULD HAVE SAID. What the President and ex-President should have said, to dispell all doubts as to their candor and patriotism, was this, when talking to their respective audiences, the President should have said, "Gentlemen, you are all engaged in com- petition; you ought to act upon the motto of 'all for each and each for all, ' but the competitive system will not let you. Before you can do it, you must wipe out competition so far as it is necessary to prevent it from interfering with your act- ing in accordance with that motto; and you can wipe it out only by changing the law, which I heartily recommend you to do. To the extent that you succeed by law in abolishing THE AVAY OUT. 37 competition, yon will be able to give each other a 'square deal' and nobody hurt." You would at the same time wipe out, practically, all dis- putes between capital and labor, which are causing so much inconvenience and distress to all classes. If the President had talked that way, he would have told them an obvious truth, besides something that was in perfect accord with his advice that "all should live for each and each for all." As it was, he left half of what he should have said unsaid. He did not tell them how they could do it. Mr. Cleveland should have said, if he was not afraid of woundins: the business side of the. brain of his auditors, "gen- tlemen, I warn you that when you enjoin unsharing content- ment upon the masses of our people and invite them in the bare subsistence of their scanty homes to patriotically rejoice in their country's prosperity, you are making a fatal mistake. "This is too unsubstantial an enjoyment of benefits to sat- isfy those who have been taught American equality, and as a perfectly natural result, they have become dissatisfied and insist upon a more equal distribution of the results of our vaunted prosperity. "This has greatly impaired the harmonious relations that formerly existed between capital and labor, and depend upon it, they will continue to grow worse at ruinous cost to both, unless something right is done to avert it. And some day, not far off, there will come a death struggle between you and labor for the mastery, and no one can predict the outcome. "Laboring men have organized, or are rapidly organizing, and it is for a purpose. You have not been just to them. As you got control of the land and machinery, they, as in- dividuals seeking employment, were placed more and more in your power and you dictated the terms and conditions of employment and scaled down wages, yet boasted of the coun- try's prosperity until you forced them to organize lor their ow^n protection, and to force you to do better b}' them than yoit had shown a willingness to do voluntarily. "That, gentlemen, is the situation that confronts you and the whole of it. You know you and your hired men have been pulling and hauling over the subject of w^ages for years; you also know, there never was a feeling of stability and secttrity among you, even after you had come to an understanding, be- cause of market fluctuations that affected the value of your goods or the cost of their living, and there never was any law that either of you could 'appeal to for the proper ad- justment of the peculiar and alarming differences that arose between you. "As a result of this absence of law, you have relied upon your ownership and control of things and your wealth, in- fleunce and power to force your hired men into submission to your terms ; while they have relied upon the perfect dis- cipline of their great and growing organization to force vou 26281'? 38 THE WAY OUT. into submission to theirs, and conditions have become more serious every year. It is now either a strike or a lock-out all the time, greatly to the annoyance and detriment of the coun- try and at great loss, even ruin, to those directly affected, besides loss of life resulting from inevitable collisions. "It is manifestly wrong and disastrous for either of you to continue trying to be a law unto yourselves (for that is what you are both trying to do). Such a course can never satisfactorily solve your disputes. It is impracticable and impossible. "If it is true, as I say, and it certainly is, that no law reaches your troubles, make one ! There is no such thing as a condition that the law of the land cannot be made to cover, and it would be a reproach upon the intelligence of our peo- ple to admit that they are unequal to any emergency that demands one. Make the law! And when it is appealed to by either side, its decision will be respected because the whole power of the nation will be behind it. It would aim to do justice, and your respective rights and interCvSts would suffer far less than under your present methods of guerilla warfare where you invoke the assistance of only such outside laws and forces as serve your purposes to conquer. "A law broad enough to hear and consider every grievance of every side would bring with it an era of good feeling and industrial harmony that would reduce all labor trouble to a minimum. " But. Mr. Cleveland did not make that kind of a speech to the Commercial Club. Why he did not, you are left to guess. My own idea is, they did not want it. nor did they want, nor do they now, any law. They probably thought their wealth and power would be sufficient to worry the hired men into subjection; and then the laws, as they are, with the police, sheriffs. United States marshals, hired detectives and militia always at their service, they could keep them in subjection while they skinned them indefinitely. If that is their idea and they can make it work, there is no doubt but what, from their standpoint they are right, for, as they look at it, as the Weekly Examiner (San Francisco) says: "To ruin competitors, to reduce a man from compe- tence to poverty, is considered as but an ordinary incident of business," and that being such a small matter, of course the consumption of hired men by overwork and insufficient pay is also an ordinary incident of business no more to be thought of than the consumption of cordwood and coal in their furnaces; both are plentiful and Avere made to increase the profits of capitalists. THE WAY OUT. 39 HAS A HIRED MAN ANY RIGHTS? If we judge of his rights by the treatment he receives from his employer, we must say, yes, he has about the same rights his employer's cattle have, not much more, and the more is of no particular benefit to him. He gets what his employer decides to give him and the cattle get the same. Do you say that is not so? Well, don't the employer fix his wages, and don't the wages he gets regulate his bed, board and clothes? If he fixes his wages, then he specifies what kind of a room and bed he may occupy, what kind of food he may eat, and what kind of clothes he may wear, as much as he specifies what kind of stable his ox or horse may occupy, what kind of feed shall be given him and how much groom- ing he shall receive. It would not be so if the man had the option of refusing the wages, but he has not, any more than the ox or horse has of refusing to w^ork for what he gets — both have to eat. "But does not the law protect the hired man?" If it does, you stop and think and tell yourself how it does. I cannot, but I can tell you how it does not. There is a law for the punishment of the employer if he cruelly overworks of underfeeds the ox or horse, but there is none to punish him if he cruelly overworks or underpays a man, boy, woman or girl. If he hires with no agreement as to how much his wages shall be, and his employer trys to pay him off when he quits with less than reasonable w^ages, he may sue and the law will compel the employer to pay reasonable wages. "There. Don't you admit the law protects him?" Certainly, in that case it would, if it would pay him to in- voke it. In the first place, it is seldom the employer is caught in that fix. He usually takes advantage of the man's eagerness to work, and tells him beforehand how much wages he will pay. If the man goes to work after being told, the law calls that a contract and holds him to it. The courts are sticklers, you know, about impairing the obligations of a contract, be- cause they say that would be unconstitutional. But it is a rare thing that this law, which is nothing new — it is older than the Bible — does the hired man any good, because he is so poor he cannot afford the expense and loss of time to go to law with his rich employer, and therefore takes what he can get rather than do it. "Well, that is not the fault of the law ; the law is all right." Certainly, the law is all right, for the rich ; it provides also a docket fee to be deposited when complaint is filed and that the officer serving the papers shall demand his fee in advance; and if the man wants a jury-, which, of course, he would in 40 THE WAY OUT. order to get justice, it requires him to put up twenty-four dol- lars more (if in the Justice of the Peace Court in California), altogether about thirty dollars, even if his lawyer asks no re- tainer. The law therefore contemplates that all hired men have a bank account, which, of course, we all know is the fact. Of late years, the laAv has become very solicitous for the rights of hired men, by giving them liens on certain things for their wages. Of course, that is a great boom. The only trouble with it is, the Supreme Court has construed it and the Legislaure has amended it until even lawyers do not know what it is; and if a hired man wished to avail himself of its benefits, if it has any, it is such an expensive and uncertain quantity, that, in most eases, he would rather lose the debt than try it. As to law that would give a hired man damages for in- juries, or his family damages if he were killed, being the result of the negligence of his employer, it is so far beyond the limits of the depleted purse of either that it cuts more of a figure on the statute books as an ornament to our vaunted civilization than a practical benefit to crippled hired men, widows or orphans. A trip to the moon in Darius Green's flying machine would be about as encouraging an undertak- ing to the hired man, or his widow, as to undertake bv law to make his employer pay suitable damages for injuries or death. What the hired man wants is laws that are within his reach. No amount of law would benefit him a particle if the machinery to set it in motion to inquire into his wrongs w'as so heavy and complicated that he could not start it. But that just suits his employer, he wants it that way. He wants it as it is. And his paid orators can and do, in glow- ing eloquence, call the hired man's attention to our beneficent laws for their welfare, of the jury system and all that, but they are very quiet as to the cost and other difficulties of getting the welfare. Ever since ships have sailed the ocean sailors have been the wards of the admiralty courts because of their peculiar help- lessness, and I would ask, is it not about time that hired men, in their helplessness, be made the -wards of the law courts ? Sailors have ahvays been looked upon as children in the hands of ship owners and masters of vessels, and the ad- miralty courts of all nations have always been open to them, without fees or costs, to libel a ship for wages and have it seized and sold to satisfy them : and I would ask again, are the hired men on shore anything more than children in the hands of such men as George F. Baer, John D. Rockefeller. J. Pieipont Morgan or Charles M. Schwab, or any railroad company or corporation? There are no employers nowa- days, you know, to speak of, but corporations and the very rich. THE WAY OUT. 41 Think of it, you toilers! Think of a poor man with a hunory family of little ones, tellinsf one of those men or corporations that he would be willino^ to consider a contract to work for him or it at certain wages; or, put it the other way, think of one of them asking such a man if he would be willing to consider employment (shoveling dirt, for instance) at certain wages. Yet the law treats eyery hired man as if he was hired in just that way, although every judge knows he is not. Well, you may think, but you will never see it. They arbitrarily fix the wages they will pay, knowing there are plenty of destitute men whom the gnawings of hunger will drive to them seeking work at any price ; and it is noth- ing less than the meanest hypocrisy for any court or the law (if the law does) to pretend that that kind of a bargain is a voluntary contract. If they were to use violence to get men, they could not get them any quicker, but they would not dare do that. The law would wake up instantly, if they did, and punish them ; so they have a way that is more effective than violence, less expensive and no law to interfere. It is a kid-glove way, polite and highly honorable, because the law, as it is made or construed, makes it so; yet violence, in any form, could not be more effective to make men work at an arbitrary price fixed by the employer, or more disas- trous to their welfare. Controlling every industry that em- ployes men, the capitalists control the output and can shut down and lock-out at any place or time they please, and re- main so until want has driven part of those discharged to wander in search of work, and those who stay, to welcome it at any price. In this lawful way, they may starve men to work on their terms or force them from -necessity to reluctantly go and help out some other capitalist, who is involved in a strike, by be- coming strike-breakers, thus defeating the efforts of their brothers to obtain just wages or fair treatment from their employer; which, but for this timely co-operation and assist- ance, he would have been compelled to grant. Here is just such a case according to an Associated Press dispatch, November, 1903 : "The Colorado Iron and Coal Company have laid off the men in their iron works, and are trying to get them to take the places of the striking coal miners." Another Associated Press dispatch savs : ' ' Shamokin, Penn., Nov. 30, 1903— The Centralia Sioux & Mt. Carmel Collieries, owned by the Lehigh Coal Co., closed down tonight for an indefinite period, throwing 2500 men and boys out of em- ployment. ' ' No explanation or excuse is offered, but as winter is just setting in, it is not because people "will not want the coaJ, so it must be done in pursuance of the plan of the coal trust 42 THE WAY OUT, to keep up prices and incidentally to starve more men into going to Colorado to become strike-breakers. But there is no law to interfere with mine owners. It is of no consequence to the law if this shut-down and lock-out compels people to pay more for coal this winter than they would need to if these 2500 men and boys were allowed to work, nor is it of any consequence to the law if these men and boys must suffer because deprived of the privilege of work- ing to earn food for themselves and provide cheaper coal for others. T say it is of no consequence to the law for the rea- son that the law could, but does not take any notice of these things. It does nothing to prevent them from happening at the pleasure of those whom it permits to control the necessi- ties of life. Ownership is superior to life. The law protects it as some- thing sacred. The people are nothing, they may freeze and starve. THE WAY OUT. 43 A PEW EXAMPLES OF THE POWER OF EMPLOY- ERS OVER THE LIVES OF HIRED MEN, WHO HAVE NO LAW FOR THEIR PROTECTION. NO LAW FOR HIRED MEN IN ILLINOIS. "Chicago, Nov. 30, 1903. — Following its announced policy of centralization, the International Harvester Co. has decided to lay off 7500 of its 19,000 employes and thus effect a saving of $5,000,000 a year." Who gets it 1 What becomes of men ? More turned loose hoping, some will get hungry and become strike-breakers? "Chicago, Dec. 4, 1903. — An industrial war, long ex- pected, has broken out in the Fox River Valley in Northern Illinois, manufacturers at Batavia, Aurora, Elgin, St. Charles and Geneva, having organized and decided to increase the hours of labor from nine to ten. The first notice was served by manufacturers at Batavia and 350 machinists quit work there today. The wage-earners are united and will resist. The industries likely to be affected include many lines from shirts to windmills. The manufacturers in the organization employ, it is estimated, 10,000 wage-earners." "Chicago, Dee. 9, 1903. — Ten hours a day, no union agreement, or no M^ork for an indefinite period, is the ulti- matum issued by three more big manufacturing concerns, members of the Fox River Valley Manufacturers' Associa- tion of Northern Illinois. These concerns are located at Batavia, and they have 1500 union employes. A general strike is expected Monday." Surrender or go hungry; that is what the employers are saying to union men. "Chicago, Dec. 14, 1903.— Three factories in the Fox River manufacturing district of Northern Illinois, employ- ing 1500 hands, shut down to-day as the result of the recent campaign of the Manufacturers' Association to re-establish a ten-hour work-day. ' ' "Joliet, 111., Dec. 14, 1903.— All three rod mills at the Joliet plant of the Illinois Steel Co. closed today for an in- definite period, throwing 500 men out of employment." They do just as they please. No law protects the men. NO LAW TO PROTECT LABORERS IN LOUISIANA, "NeAv Orleans, Oct. 10, 1903.— Protected by half of the police force and twenty deputies and marshals, the St. Louis strike-breakers are put to work on the levee and work all day without molestation. Escaping strike-breakers from the housing ship Colonian declare that the ship is loaded with ammiTii+ion and arms, and that armed guards prevent 44 THE WAY OUT. the strike-breakers, who were brought here without knowledge of a strike, from leaving the ship and joining the strikers with whom they sympathized." Even men sent to break strike are deceived and made to work against their will. NO LAW IN PENNSYLVANIA FOR OPPRESSED t.aBOR, BUT PLENTY OF MILITIA TO DO THE BIDDING OF THE COAL OWNERS, "Wilkesbarre, Penn., August 29, 1902. — General Gobin has ordered the soldiers to shoot to kill if there is any trouble to-morrow, and an attack will mean the killing and wounding of many. While martial law has not yet been proclaimed. General Gobin 's statement issued tonight means practically the same thing. He says: 'The conditions are outrageous, but the law is going to be enforced at whatever the cost and at once. To-morrow morning the soldiers will go out with loaded guns, and they will take the men who want to work to the mines. If there is any interference, any at- tack or any refusal to obey orders, they will shoot to kill.' " In 1902 about 150,000 coal miners in Pennsylvania struck for living wages and were refused. After several months, extending into the winter of 1902 and 1903, when there was great suffering among the people, who could not pay the greatly increased price of coal, put on, not because of its pf^arcity, but arbitrarily by a combination to make money, President Roosevelt was induced by public opinion to inter- fere, and he finally got the owners to consent to submit all matters involved in the strike dispute to a commission to be appointed by him. On this arrangement, the minere went back to work. The commission heard both sides fully and de- cided in favor of the miners, granting substantially all they had asked. Just think of it I Pennsylvania was one of the original thirteen States of the Union, and had been making laws ever since; yet never made one these men could appeal to to obtain just wages or treatment, and corporations, worth hundreds of millions of dollars, were permitted to treat their hired men like slaves, with the difference that they could not stand them- up on an auction block to be sold to the highest bidder. In other respects, their power over their lives was as abso- lute as was ever the power of a slave owner before the Civil War. Because there was no law, they tried to make use of their wealth, influence and power to stars^e their over-worked and underpaid men into submission to such arbitrary terms of employment as it pleased thera to dictate, and a capitalistic governor even placed the militia of the State at their service by display of force to intimidate the miners and aid and abet the owners in satisfying their greed. Perhaps you will ask, "Did the miners have no friends?" Yes, among the common people, but not in any law. Law THE WAY OUT. 45 was not made for them. It was made for the rich. Had' the principle this book contends for been law, there would have been no strike, no suffering from lack of coal to keep warm, and no losses. As it M^as, the losses sustained the first fifteen weeks were reported as follows: "Wilkesbarre, August 23, 1903.— At the end of the fifteenth week of the strike, the estimated losses are as follows : Loss to operators in price of coal $35,700,000 Loss to strikers in wages 19,900,000 Loss to employes, other than miners, idle by- strike ." 4,500,000 Loss to business men in coal regions 12,120,000 Loss to business men outside region 6,700,000 Cost of maintaining coal and iron police. . . . 900,000 Cost of maintaining non-union workers 400,000 Damage to mines and machinery 6,500,000 Cost of maintaining troops in the field 220,000 ' Total $86,940,000" Why was not arbitration resorted to sooner? Because the owners, vain with wealth and power, disdainfully said: "We have nothing to arbitrate." Senator Mark Hanna and othere tried to get the coal owners to agree to a conference with the men, but gave it up. He said : "I have exhausted my efforts, I have done all in my power and can do no more. I will make no further attempts, for it would be useless. There is no chance of arbitration so long as only one side, the miners, was willing to arbitrate. ' ' We get an idea of the views of men w^ho have "nothing to arbitrate," from a letter written by President Baer of the Pennsylvania & Reading Railroad Company. The following dispatch tells the story : "Wilkesbarre, August 20, 1903.— W. F. Clark, a photographer of this city, recently addressed a letter to Presi- dent Baer, appealing to him, as a Christian, to settle the miners' strike. The writer said that if Christ were taken into our business affairs there would be less trouble in the world, and that if Mr. Baer granted the strikers a slight con- cession they would gladly return to work and the president of the Philadelphia & Reading Railroad Company would have the blessing of God and the respect of the nation." President Baer replied as follows: "I see you are evidently biased in your religious views in favor of the right of the workingman to control a business in which he has no other interest than to secure fair wages for the work he does. I beg of you not to be discouraged. The rights and interests of the laboring man will be protected and cared for, not by the labor agitators, but by the Christian 46 THE WAY OUT. men to whom God in His infinite wisdom has given the con- trol of the property interests of the country. Pray earnest- ly that the right may triumph, always remembering that the XiOrd God Omnipotent still reigns and that his reign is one of law and order, and not of violence and crime." We also get an idea from the following published criti- cisms of how the country construed what Mr. Baer wrote: '^BAER IS DENOUNCED ALL O'S^R THE COUNTRY, "New York, August 21, 1902.— President Baer, of the Philadelphia & Reading Railroad, has shocked the country with his remarkable letter ascribing the possession of the coal fields by himself and his associates to Divine intention. "From every side has come a gale of caustic and aston- ished comments. "A priest is quoted, a political economist gives his views, one of the largest capitalists in the world expresses his amaze- ment, and two lawyers of distinction testify to the universal surprise at the queer opinions of President Baer." "So President Baer thinks that God gave the mines to the operators and that the miners are simply interested in re- ceiving their wages each week, does he?" Russel Sage ex- plained. "Well, I would not be surprised if President Baer woke up some morning and found that God had given IMr. Morgan the mines and ever>'thing else in sight ; however, I believe the mines were designed for the common good of the people, and the manner in which they are worked is of vital importance to the miners." W. Bourke Cochrane made the following strong comment : "I don't believe that in creating the coal mines or other sources of commodities, God had in view the bestowal of them upon the present owners. I believe that all natural products were created by God for the benefit of the whole human race. As coal, like all commodities, must be produced before it is distributed, whoever wantonly or unnecessarily causes the production to be suspended or restricted is an enemy to God and man. The laborers are, of course, interested in the proper working of the mines by those who have charge of them." The denunciation by Charles F. Adams, of the law firm of Coudert Brothers, is an epitome of numberless opinions, which were expressed to-day to an American reporter. I\Ir. Adams said: "It is blasphemy. The idea that God turned over the coal mines to the coal operators! ^^^ly, it is ridiculous. The only reason why I do not care to go further into discussion of the subject is that I would no doubt use terms which might offend." The following expression is from Bolton Hall of East Hampton, son of Rev. Dr. John Hall : "My opinion is that, as the Scripture says, 'The earth hath THE WAY OUT. 47 He given, including the coal mines in it, to all the children of men, not only to some of them, and that as soon as the said children know enough to take for themselves the value of the mines and of the rest of the earth in taxes, year by year, they will not care who has charge of it. ' ' If the Lord gave landlords charge of the mines, he hardly instructed them to charge a hundred per cent profit on the coal, and to put the proceeds into their own pockets." <* Now, who is right, Mr. Baer or his critics? Mr. Baer says: "The rights and interests of the laboring men will be protected and cared for, by the Christian men, to whom God has given the control of the property interests of the country." Two propositions are stated here : First: "The rights and interests of the laboring man will be protected and cared for." Second: They will be protected and cared for, "by the men to whom God has given the control of the property in- terests of the country." By these two it is implied, first, that God actually gave to ceftain men control of the property interests of the country; and, second, in doing so, especially placed the rights and in- terests of the men in their employ under their protection to be "cared for." Now, if there had been any law in Pennsylvania that pro- tected the rights and interests of laboring men, Mr. Baer never would have written what he did about their protection — "by the men who control the property interests of the country. ' ' He said it because there was no law, and that was enough to give him color of right, if not the right, because the men were working for him. - But, it will be asked, how could Mr. Baer .justify himself for the ridiculous assertion that God, in His infinite wisdom, gave control of the property interests of the country to cer- tain men? If he had said God gave it to the people, the State, it would not have been so bad. Perhaps I should answer that I do not know, but, by what- ever process of reasoning he convinced himself, it must be conceded that it was an honest thought; otherwise, he would not have so emphatically expressed himself; neither the lan- guage nor the occasion for using it .justifies one in thinking he meant to play with M^ords or invite a discussion, but merely meant to state a truth as he saw it, and with confi- dence as if he supposed every other thinking person saw it the same way. It is hardly conceivable that so smart a man as Mr. Baer could have wished to unnecessarily and wantonly antagonize the world on this proposition, unless he thought it had an important bearing on the matter in hand, nor that he would 48 THE WAY OUT. have stated it so boldly unless convinced of its truths, or be- lieved everybody else was convinced of it. As to whj^ he did not say instead, that, God gave control of the property interests of the country to the States, it was not necessary. It is apparent to all that God did, originally, give it to the State, and that the State, in the exercise of itsi supposed sovereign right to do so, parted with its title and control (in the coal lands) to Mr. Baer and his associates, so that, when he says God gave it to him and others, his con- clusion may not, after all, be as far from the truth as his critics imagined. God did give him control, that is, He gave it to the State and the State gave it to him, which is the same thing, for the State is the people and what the people do God does through them, because "the voice of the people is the voice of God." It would seem, therefore, that Mr. Baer's critics are wrong, and that no one can justly blame him for his position. He is exactly Avhere the people, including his able critics, have deliberately placed him in the matter of the control of the property interests of the country, and where they, themselves, actually are, though, perhaps, in a less degree by the same authority; but, they (his critics) had wandered so far from their first high and perfect conception of God's intention that the whole earth should always be controlled by the peo- ple, that they did not realize how far away they had drifted from, and how much they had ignored His intention, until awakened and startled by the voice of Mr. Baer in asserting his own divine right, as if God had deeded straight to him. If he had explained more at length the round-about way that God gave it, as to the State and the State to him, it would not have sounded so sacriligious. However, reflection should have convinced them that he is logically right; but, if, in fact, he is a sinner, some day they must all answer for the same offense. It is easy to see why Mr. Baer should express his opinion as to who will look out for the rights of the laboring man,, since the law does not do it, and the Labor Unions are claim- ing the right, and, in trying to exercise it, naturally inter- fering with his designs. Bnt it is not so easy to understand why he should raise a question of his Divine control of prop- erty interests. However, he did it, and in such an off-hand, matter of fact, blunt and business-like way, without explanation, that he stirred up a hornet's nest, mostly among other capitalists, who take pains to call his assertion "blasphemous" and "ridicu- lous." They do not object at all to the present arrangement as to the control of property interests or as to wages. In fact, they have devoted their whole lives to helping make the ar- rangement w^hat it is and would oppose vigorously any ef- fort to change it, but they think he is perfectly awful to call THE WAY OUT. 49 people's attention to it in sncli bold, rash language, it might set those in control to thinking, and if they once get to think- ing there is no telling what they might do to that arrange- ment. Probably Mr. Baer himself never thought of that, but, like all business men, being accustomed to expressing himself iu the most direct and terse terms, he simply meant to call things by their right names and not waste words. Should the common people, Avhom God has so far neglect- ed to give control of any of the property interests of the country, abuse Mr. Baer, as some of his rich friends would seem to hvvo done, and they will be liitcly to do it, for it is a matter concerning wliich they are probably at present con- spicuously and blissfull}^ ignorant, it will only show how stupid, blind and unappreciative they can sometimes be. However, they will get riglit sometime and they ticn will gratefully acknowledge his brief but valuable contribution to the science of controlling, through the intervention of tlie Al- mighty, the property interests of the country. For my part, I feel under obligations to Mr. Baer and think it was brave in him (since he was already enjoying all the benefits that flow from the control of certain coal prop- erty interests of the country) to voluntarily, and without any apparent provocation, proclaim the true foundation upon which his title and control rests, and challenge men to think. ANOTHER CUT. " Connelsville, Penn., Dec. 15, 1903.— Reduction of wages averaging 17 per cent and affecting thirty thousand men at the Connelsville coke region is announced to-day. The H. C. Frick Coke Co. takes the initiative in this, the first reduction since the great strike of the early nineties. Simultaneously was the announcement of the reduction of wages by the Union Supply Company, owner of all com- pany stores and plants of the Frick and allied companies, which announced a general cut in the price of goods. ' ' Is a cut a contract '? Certainly, if made by a rich cor- poration. Of course, there is never but one party to a cut contract, so it is really a one-party contract, but it is a eon- tract just the same in Pennsylvania. The company orders the cut and the men are forced to submit to it, but under the law this force is not force, so that makes it a contract. If 30,000 men are affected, probably 90,000 people are affected, as it affects their families also. But it is a contract, and if the men were to ask the court to award them reasonable wages it would tell them so, even if they worked because they had to or starve. 50 THE WAY OUT. MORE PROOFS OF PLUTOCRATIC POWER. NO LAW IN NEW ENGLAND. SIXTY-FOUR THOITSAND OPERATORS OPPRESSED. Boston, Nov. 30, 1903.— The wages of 32,000 cotton textile operatives were reduced an average of ten per cent. This brings the total number in New England, whose wages have been cut this fall, to about 64,000 and other reductions next Monday will swell the number to about 75,000. This ^^'ill complete the general reduction in the Southern New Eng- land cotton mills. Reports of the new schedules are receiv- ed without serious protests." What good would it do to protest? There is no law for the operatives. The operators can do as they please. They want their usual dividends and the^- will have them. They do not say to the operatives: "We will share the cut with you and reduce dividends ten per cent." No, the law is all with them. The operatives have no voice, but must take what the operators see fit to allow them. Undoubtedly, however, the laws and courts of New 'England unanimously, unhesitating- ly and unequivocally hold that every one of those sixty-four to seventy-five thousand workers are working under a con- tract solemnly entered into, which should be enforced, if called in question, by the whole power of the State, and, if necessary, the nation. NO LAW IN COLORADO. MORE miners' families PERSECUTED. Trinidad, Colo., Nov. 18. 1903. — ^National Organizers Ken- nedy, Warjohn and Campbell, of the United Mine Workers, went to Hastings, a Victor Fuel Company camp, this morning and were arrested for tresspassing by company guards and locked up for several hours. They were released in time to arrive here on the evening train. Miners' families were evicted from company houses at Hast- ings and Delagua to-day and a wagon load of tents were sent from union headquarters here, but guards refused to allow the tents to be delivered, although it is bitter cold. Convey- ances were sent to bring the evicted families to Trinidad. Trouble is feared at Hastings and more guards have been add- ed. The miners are much incensed over the evictions." Even the army of the United States is at the disposal of the rich to fight the poor for demanding what the law should give them — just wages. Listen to this : "Washington, Nov. 19, 1903. — President Roosevelt has re- THE WAY OUT. 51 ceived a dispatch from Governor Peabody of Colorado, ask- ing: that General BaldM'in, commanding the Department of Colorado, be instructed to supply such troops as may be nec- essary to preserve order in the Telluride mining district. After a consultation between the President and the Secretarj^ of War, Governor Peabody was advised that it did not appear that the resources of the State to keep the peace had been exhausted, and therefore, the request for troops was denied." The only reason the United States troops did not march against the miners was, the Governor did not make it appear that the militia was unable to do all the mine owners wanted done. The request is "to preserve order," yet no disorder is com- plained of, and there was npne. General Bates, who was sent by the President to investi- gate, reported (Nov. 29th) : "There is an unsettled condition at the coal mines in the southern and northern districts, which fnay develop into such disorder as to require troops. At present, I understand, no violence is being offered in the coal districts. ' ' Now, the truth is, and the history of every strike proves it, neither soldiers nor hired guards were ever necessary to com- pel the strikers to be orderly, that is, not law-breakers to the extent of requiring troops to restrain them. It would be senseless to say or expect that men, in large bodies, where interests are at stake and passions aroused, would not have more or less personal encounters, but to say these are insurrec- tions demanding the presence of troops, is nothing less than exaggeration; in short a lie, and it is for a purpose, a selfish and malicious purpose ; it is to prejudice the public against the hired men. When a circus comes to town, or there is a horse race, or the Fourth of July attracts a crowd, there are usually dis- turbances; but is the militia ordered out? No; fights are anticipated and a few extra officers are sworn in to cope with disturbers, but there is as much need of troops in such cases as in cases of strikes were there no ulterior motives for the use of troops. One motive is given by Mary Simmons Johnson in the July (1903) number of Wilshire's Magazine: "Workingmen be- lieve that through the instrumentality of their powerful em- ployers the militia is ordered out in strikes primarily to in- timidate them." And I would add that another motive is to prevent union men from going among non-union men . and persuading them to join the union and not "scab." They fear the argument of the strikers far more than their violence, but they cry violence to get the. soldiers, and they get them because most of the Sheriffs and the Governors of most of the States belong to the capitalist class or are cowardly, cring- ing flunkeys of capitalists, always ready and willing to prosti- tute the brief power they possess to serve them, even at the expense of manhood and of justice to the hired men. 52 THE WAY OUT. A TOOL, A FOOL, A COWARD AND A BRUTE. Denver, Colo., Nov. 25, 1903. — General Bell called his sten- ographer into his office this afternoon and dictated the first statement for publication : "We will fight it out in Colorado if it takes every able- bodied man in the State, and some who are disabled to the end that law and order be maintained and socialism, anarchy and Moyerism wiped off the earth until there is not a grease spot left to assassinate, dynamite, molest, disturb, or in any manner interfere v/ith the commercial conditions of the peace of illustrious Colorado." Denver, Colo., Dec. 6. — Sherman Bell, Brigadier-General. Adjutant-General, State of Colorado, protege of Colonel Roosevelt, has issued a proclamation defining the status of martial law in the Cripple Creek mining district that is caus- ing uncontrollable mirth. Bell's ofificiousness has been the laughing stock of the State. His telegram to the President offering the services of the Colorado National Guard to hold down a canal route across the isthmus recently caused the War Department and all official Washington to smile audibly. His passion to advertise himself as the protege of Colonel Roosevelt, who calls him "Sherman," has made him the sub- ject of scores of cartoons, and now his literary genius is the subject of editorial comment in the papers of the State. In his proclamation headed, "Instruction for the Govern- ment of Armies and Troops in the Field, Martial Law, Mili- tary Jurisdiction, Military Necessity, Retaliaton, ' ' he declares that: "Military necessity admits of all direct destruction of life and limb of armed enemies and other persons whose destruc- tion is incidentally unavoidable. Military necessity does not admit of cruelty. It does not admit of the use of poison in any way. It admits of deception, but disclaims acts of perfidy. It is not carried on bj^ arms alone." He defines a spy. assassinations, insurrection and treason, the latter punishable by death, and continues: "Every law-abiding citizen in the county of Teller and State of Colorado, if he, she, they or whom are engaged in any legitimate business, no matter what their vocation in life, regardless of their union or non-union affiliation and creed, shall first obey the laws of the land, those of Colorado and the United States of America included; and no one shall be interfered with nor in any way molested at any time during the night or day, under penalty of military law, rule, disci- pline and protection." Preceding the official signature to this remarkable document is the following: "I trust that mining and all business in the Cripple Creek district shall continue to improve and prosper and that peace, prosperity and happiness shall continue in the greatest gold mining camp in all the world as it should and henceforth for- THE WAY OTTT 53 ever be; and that it shall continue to receive the best com- pensation, both in hours and wages, in the entire country." MARTIAL liAW REIGNS IN CRIPPLE CREEK. Cripple Creek, Colo., Dec. 6. — As a result of the proclama- tion of General Bell the entire Cripple Creek district is now under martial law. The civil authorities have been dethroned contrary to the statutes of the State of Colorado, which provide that the military shall always be in strict subordination to the civil power. Disretyarding the advice of Attorney-General Mil- ler, Governor Peabody two days ago decided to place the dis- trict under martial law and ordered that the officers in com- mand take possession of the offices occupied by the Sheriff, !Mayor and several others. Under the proclamation issued last nig-ht. the military has called for the surrender of all firearms in possession of private citizens by December 8th, failing: to deliver which the Na- tional Guard is empowered to enter the private houses of such persons as is deemed advisable and confiscate all such arms. The newspapers and correspondents of the district liave been suppressed to a g'reat extent and all news sent out of the district will be perused by a censor, w^hose name has not yet been divulged. While Sheriff Robertson of Teller county has all along claimed that he was perfectly able to preserve order, he was overriden by the Governor, who insist- ed upon the presence of the militia. ^'bUIjL pen" OUTRAGES. Shortly afer the advent of the militia four months ago under command of General Sherman Bell, miners known to be either members or sympathizers ^vith the miners' union were arrested by the National Guard Avithout cause and con- fined in the military ''bull pen." Writs of habeas corpus for their release were issued by Judge Seeds of the District Court, but for some time General John Chase, in charge of the forces in the field, refused to recognize such proceedings and openly defied the order of the civil court. After much consultation with able lawyers, how- ever, Governor Peabody was convinced that Chase's acts were in violation of the statutes and, accompanied by half a regi- ment of soldiers, he marched to the Teller County Court- house and delivered over the prisoners. It was here that a disgraceful scene was enacted, the sol- diers patrolling the court-room and shoving bayonets into the faces of all who entered therein. Judge Seeds, rather than stir up more dissention, quietly submitted to this proceedure on the part of the military. He, however, commented upon it in bitter tones during the hearing of the miners, who were released for lack of evidence. 54 THE WAY OUT. STOPS FREE SPEECH, The next arbitrary act on the part of the military authori- ties was to suppress the Victor "Daily Record," a newspaper friendly to the Western Federation of Miners, and which had been too active in its editorial comment to suit the tastes of General Sherman Bell and Governor Peabody. Under the instructions of the latter, the military swooped down upon the "Record" office at midnight some time ago and placed every employee under aiTCst, confining them in the bull pen for three days, when they were released upon habeas corpus writs. The arrest of these, however, did not suppress the paper, for Mrs. Emma Langdon, wife of one of the lineotype operators, upon learning of what had happened, came to the office at midnight, locked the doors to prevent the militia from entering, and single-handed got out the paper, at the head of which appeared the following: "A little battered, but still in the ring." Mrs. Langdon, after the paper was on the street, proceeded to the military camp with an armful of the publications and distributed them among the soldiers. Early yesterday an editorial commenting upon the act of the Governor in proclaiming martial law, which was to ap- pear in the "Record," was suppressed by the military and the paper appeared with a blank space where the editorial should have been. The blank space suggested to the public that an editorial had been suppressed. Sheriff Robertson expressed great surprise when relieved of his duties by the Governor's order and denied the latter 's statement that he had been nesiigent in serving warrants whenever placed in his hands. The Governor gave as his rea- son for putting the district under martial law that a state of insurrection and anarchy exists and that the civil authorities are powless and unwilling to suppress it. The Sheriff de- nies that he is unable or unwilling to perform his duties and intimates that Peabody. acting as a tool of the mine owners, has heaped these insults upon the citizens in order to break the strike now in progress. RELEASED BY JUDGE. Judge Seeds last week released on $15,000 bonds Charles G. Kennison, G. F. Davis and Sherman Parker, who are charged with having placed in the Vindicator's shaft as in- fernal machine by which Charles ^NTcCormick and Emil Beck lost their lives two weeks ago. These men were likewise re- leased on habeas corpus writs, much to the dissatisfaction of th military authorities. Judge Seeds, however, contends that in view of the insufficient evidence the bail is plenty large enough and that the accused are entitled to their free- dom. Governor Peabody was smarting \vith anger to-day when he read the proclamation issued and read by General Bell in THE AVAY OUT. 55 Victor last night placing the CrippleCreek district under full martial law. "I am surprised at the idiotic action of General Bell in ordering the surrender of all weapons," said the Governor. "The district is under a limited martial law, but we do not intend to be so radical as Bell's proclamation would in- fer. Martial law has been declared simply to suppress the crimes which have been rampant." BELL IS RECALLED. The Governor stated that he had ordered Bell back to the Capitol, where he belongs, and not to further interfere with Colonel Verdeckburg, the executive officer of the district. The feeling against Governor Peabody for his action in declaring Cripple Creek and the district under martial law has reached an intense stage, and on all sides the chief exec- utive is being denounced for what the majority of Cripple Creek residents term an unpardonable action. Sheriff Robertson denied to-night that he had in any way been partial to the miners' union by refusing to serve war- rants placed in his hands, and intimated that the Governor is a willing tool of the mine owners, who have all along work- ed to have martial law declared. Judge Seeds also stated that the declaration of Governor Peabody to the effect that convictions of guilty persons can- not be secured under civil rule is a falsehood. SUSPENDS HABEAS CORPUS. Denver, December 4. — Governor Peabody bases his decision to declare limited martial law on the decision of the Idaho Supreme Court, which declared that the Act of the Governor of Idaho in putting into force to a limited extent martiali law in the Couer d'Alene was in thorough harmony with the Constitution of that State. The constitutional provision re- lating to suspension of the writ of habeas corpus in this State is similar to that of the Idaho Constitution. Colonel Edward Verdeckberg, commander of the military force in Cripple Creek, was with the Governor when he dic- tated the proclamation. He left for Cripple Creek this aft- ernoon with a copy of the proclamation. Wholesale arrests of strikers suspected of implication in the Vindicator explosion and other cases of violence will be made to-morrow. The "bull pen" will be enlarged so as to accommodate several hundred prisoners." Give us more Bells, Avhose enthusiasm in serving capital- ists exceeds their discretion, and the devilish designs of the rich to force the poor into submission will sooner awaken them to action. Bells are a blessing in disguise. Laboring men do not see until knocked down a few times that somebody*^ "wants to rob and enslave them. I wonder if this will make them think? Telluride, Colo., Nov. 30, 1903.— Justice of the Peace War- 56 THE WAY OUT. rington Robinson to-day issued a lot of John Doe warrants to Sheriff Rulan, to be used as he sees fit. The sheriff says that Grovernor Peabody ordered the militia to Telluride on condition that "agitators, idlers and trouble- breeders be driven from the camp" and that he will use the blanket warrants to accomplish this result. The union leaders regard this action as an invasion of their rights. Thirty-eight men were arrested on warrants and sixteen of them fined $15 each for vagrancy. Sentence was suspended until Wednesday, when the men will be placed in jail unless they are at work. ' ' Don't you like it? You struck to get what the law should give you for the asking, and because you did, the Governor calls you "agitators, idlers and turouble-breeders to be driven from camp," and if you don't go you are to be arrested as vargrants. The militia are sent "on condition that you are made to get out. Does this mean that you shall hush and work on the employers' terms, or be .iailed as vagrants or get? Telluride, Colo.,' Nov. 30, 1903.— Work is gradually being resumed on all the mining properties in this district. Prepa- rations are being made to import non-union men this week." WHERE DO THEY CONNIE FROM? The dispatch says, "non-union men." If they are non-union men it is not from choice. But may they not be hungry union men from Shamo- kin or Chicago ? You may be sure of one thing, most of them would refuse to take the place of the strikers if necessity did not compel them to do it. THE WAY OUT. 57 WHAT IS YOUR OPINION? Do you think the four or five thousand striking- miners re- ferred to in the following^ dispatch were honest or dishonest? Did they stand there in the cold with serions and anxious faces, listening to their great leader because they were evil- minded and bent on doing: somebody a wrong, or was it be- cause they thought somebody was wronging them and refused to stop it? I have no doubt you will say they were honest although some of you may say they were mistaken. But sup- pose they wei-e mistaken ? So long as they thought they were right, should they not have the right to bring those into court whom they accused of wronging them and have the matter fully invesigated and determined? The law gives you that right if somebody wrongs you, but it will have absolutely nothing to do with the wrongs these men complain of, and that is why so many of them are there shivering in the cold, consulting what to do, and eagerly listening to the advice of John Mitchell. The picture of this little army of poorly paid, poorly fed and poorly clothed miners, standing there in the open air in December, half frozen, listening to a speech on their rights and duties as men, reminds one of AVashington 's little army of ragged and hungry patriots bravely enduring the rigors of winter at Valley Forge for the sake of freedom. Trinidad, Colo., Dec. 3d, 1903.— With the temperature at freezing point. President ]\Iitchell addressed a crowd estimated at between 4000 and 5000 in the open air this after- noon. The crowd shivered from cold but listened attentively throughout, frequently interrupting the speaker with cheers. Mr. Mitchell said in part: "I cannot tell when or how the strike will end, whether in a day or a month, or a year, that depends on yourselves. You cannot hope to win without mak- ing sacrifices. I have been in many strikes and have seen starvation and eviction. Strikes are serious things, not pleas- ure, and men must strike bravely. An organization that has met victory in great Pennsylvania. Strikes cannot be driven from Colorado. Our organization is 380,000 strong, too strong to be beaten in this State. If you are of the ?ame mind as I am you will mine no more coal until you receive fair compensation under proper conditions. You should all obey the law, and this a good man will do. You must fight peaceably. ' ' Do you imagine these eight hundred women are pleading with the President of the United States to protect bad men, anarchists and insurrectionists? Cripple Creek, Colo., Dec. 5, 1903. — In consequence of Governor Peabody's order placing this district under martial law a committee of the women's auxiliary of the labor unions 58 THE WAY OUT. of this city, numbering eight hundred members, has tele- graphed President Roosevelt ' ' appealing to him for protection against unjust ruling of the governor of the State." Who is it that is carrying on with a high hand ? "The declaration of martial law has paralyzed ^11 busi- ness in this city. Heavily armed pickets of the National Guard are stationed at all street comers and many residents do not venture on the streets. Provost INlarshal McClelland is occupying the Mayor's office and has caused the arrest of several persons. The Western Federation of IMiners is pre- paring to make a joint fight against martial law and for the release of their members now confined in various jails and bull-pens. Following the supression of the Victor Record Provost Marshal McClelland to-day threatened to cut off Cripple Creek from the outside world by locking up the correspon- dents of Denver papers and censor all matters sent Denver newspapers." Is this the language of men without a grievance? "Denver, Dec. 5, 1903.— The Executive Board of the West- ern Federation of i\Tiners to-day issued an address pledging the moral and financial support of the organization to its mem- bers in Colorado, Arizona, California, Nevada and every other locality where they are fighting a battle against cor- porate despotism and for the uplifting of humanity to a higher plane of civilization." To the coal miners who have joined in the fight for eight- hour day, the address says: "We pledge the deathless fra- ternity of our organization." Concerning Governor Peabody's action in placing Cripple Creek under martial law the address says : "The Executive Board can find no words satisfactorily strong to denounce this act in the most brutal drama of coer- cion that makes a Russian Siberia a paradise when compared to Colorado. "We know no surrender, and justice will arise from the staggering blow administered by a soulless executive and the future will record the political revenge of an oppressed peo- ple, who are awakening from their lethargy to smite unbridled tyranny a blow that will end in its eternal death. ' ' Do not be too hard on poor Peabody, boys ; he is a todyist of course, but he cannot help it. He is the legitimate offspring of conditions that have existed for a long time. Let us wipe out the conditions that produced him and the breed will soon become extinct. THE WAY OUT. 59 MINERS' ORGANIZATION TREATED WITH CON- TEMPT BY MINE OWNERS. "Denver, Dee. 3, 1903.— Delosa Chappell, President of the Victor Fnel Company and F. J. Hearne, of the Colorado Fuel Iron Co., held a conference to-day to agree upon a line of action to l^e pursued in respect to any proposition that may be received from the United Mine Workers lookino; to a settle- ment of the strike in Southern Colorado. It was decided to reject any proposition that may come from the United Mine Workers. ' ' "Our course is fully determined upon," siid ^Ir. Chappell. "We have nothing whatever to do with Mr. Mitchell and his collegue. ' ' Never mind, miners, "Every dog has his day" and "it is a long lane that has no turn." Stick together and vote together and you will by and by officer the government of the State and Nation and these contemptious nabobs will fawn around you for favors like whipped puppies. MORE HIGHHANDED INJUSTICE IN COLORADO. Denver, Colo., Dec. 2, 1903. — A special to the Ncavs from Telluride, says eight of the seventeen strikers who were ar- rested on the charge of vagrancy Monday, and fined and given until this afternoon to leave town or return to work, were re- arrested to-day and lodged in .jail. The others were not found by the deputy sheriff although it is not believed any of them have left town and not one of them has returned to work nor paid his fine. It is understood that the men will be put to work on the streets under guard. Twelve non-union m.en ar- rived in Telluride to-night. Telluride, Colo., Dec. 3, 1903.— Eight of the seventeen striking miners Avho were arrested on the charge of vagrancy were put to work on the streets to-day under guard. Some of them had monej'- but they preferred to work out their fines rather than pay them. Mr. Mitchell and other mine workers officials were served to-day with papers in a damage suit for $S5,000 filed by the Victor Fuel Co. President Mitchell was to-day served with a summons to court in the suit of the Victor Fuel Co., for an injunction to restrain the United Mine Workers' officials from interfering in any manner with the operation of the com- pany's mines." Ordered to leave town or return to work ! Return where to work? To the Victor Fuel Co. of course. Oh No! The troops are not for the purpose of intimidating 60 THE WAY OUT. anybody. They are "to keep order." These men have .just quit working for that company for a eause which they deemed sufficient, and the chances are that they have money enough to pay their way. How then, can they be vagrants? If a man stops work because he wants to and has money to pay his way, does that make him a vagrant to be ordered out of town? If that rule was applied to all. where would many of the officials and stockholders of the Victor Fuel Company fetch up? THE CONSPIRACY FINALLY EXPOSED. GENERAL BELL GIVES REASONS FOR RESIGNING. Denver, Colo., May 22, 1904.— ''The State militia was de- graded to the uses of corporations which connived at the breaking of the law. The very men whom we used troops to protect, imported all-around bad men, the very men I ran out of their camps, to break the law in Denver and carried the election in their interests. "With this statement Adjutant Gen- eral Bell, heretofore the right-hand man of Governor Peobody in his military methods of handling recent labor troubles, an- nounced to-day his purpose to resign his position and have nothing more to do with what he considers an improper use of the State forces. "I shall resign the office of Adjutant General probably to- morrow and by the first of July there will be another man in my place," he continued, " I do not approve of using the militia of the State to help any political movement. I am ac- cused of using, or attempting to use the militia in the late campaign. This is false, but the corporations uspd the militia for their purposes, and inst/^ad of the militia being used to protect the people and uphold the law, that force was actual- ly used to encourage trouble." There you have it, from the lips of the hiehest officer in command of the troops that they were used by corporations under the pretense of protecting the people and upholding the law, when actually, they were used to encourage trouble." THE WAY OUT. Gl NO LAW IX UTAH To protect the rights and interests of laboring men, but ])lenty of it and plenty of officials and militia to help cor- porations defeat their rights. "Salt Lake, Nov. 28, 1903.— Vice-President Kramer, of the Utah Fuel Co., has replied to Gov. Well's telegram of yester- day asking if he (Kramer) would meet a committee from the Miners' Union and endeavor to settle the coal ininers' strike in Carbon county. In his reply Mr. Kramer positively declined to meet repre- sentatives of the United Mine AA^orkers of America on the ground that the present condition of aifairs was brought about "for the sole purpose of aiding their organizers in installing their union in its supremacy to the law, order, dignity and peace of the State and the absolute exclusion from work of all employes of the Utah Fuel Co. who would not join their Union. ' ' Why should not Mr. Kramer decline to meet representatives of the United Mine Workers when he knows, with the aid of the State militia he is independent of them and can down them"? The militia are there to do his bidding and help him do it. Suppose the weight of the militia's influence was trans- ferred to the miners' side of the scale, what then? But think of his impudence and assurance in accusing the laboring men of striking "for the sole purpose of installing their union in its supremacy to the law," which is not true, "and the absolute exclusion from work of all who would not join the union?" What was the Utah Fuel Co. "installed" for? Was it not to corral and obtain a monopoly on all the coal in the State to the "absolute exclusion" of everybody else? Was it not for the "sole" purpose of forcing everybody who used coal to pay monoply prices for it? Is there nothing then, in the objects and purposes of his company that is equivalent to "installing it in its supremacy to the law, order, dignity and peace of the State?" Per- haps not, but it will disturb the peace of mind of tens of thousands of people to dig up the price of a ton or two of coal just the same, and it would also disturb the dignity and good order of every miner 's family to learn how to live on the very lowest living wages, if he had to work for the company and the union was not strong enough to protect his right to just wages. 62 THE WAY OUT. PERSECUTE MINERS' FAMILIES. "Scofield, Utah, Nov. 30, 1903.— Armed guards to-day be- gan the work of serving notices of eviction on the striking miners occupying houses on leased company's grounds. No disturbances are reported." You see the company was cunning enough to get the poor miners to live on land it owned, and often to build their own houses on land leased of the company, so in case of a strike, it could hold the threat and fear of eviction before them as a club, hoping thereby to prevent a strike or force them back to work if they should strike. You can imagine how intensely loyal the men must be to the union and its principles when they will suffer being put out of doors in winter in that high cold climate, rather than further submit to the company's injustice. Men made of that kind of stuff will do to tie to, and some day they will VOTE together, and then their rich oppressors will have to get off the bridge and let them pilot the ship. NO UNION MAN NEED APPLY. Salt Lake, Dec. 2, 1903. — A Tribune special from Scofield, Utah quotes William Price, the United Mine AYorkers' rep- resentative there, as stating the strike would be declared off and the men at once returned to work provided the Utah Fuel Company would guarantee that no discriminations were made against the employment of union men in the future. "If we are not given that guarantee," Mr. Price is quoted as saying, "the fight will be continued as long as the national organiza- tion exists." When President Kramer of the Utah Fuel Co. was shown the Price interview to-night he said: "To work union and non-union men in the mine is impossible, men who refuse to join the union would be intimidated and there would ])e too much danger of accidents. We are willing to take back in our employ all strikers who have not been agitators, and who have not destroyed property, provided they will give up their union cards. That is as far as we can go. ' ' Salt Lake, Dec. 14, 1903. — "Any miner who wants to work for the Utah Fuel Co. must choose between the Company and the Miners' Union," said Vice-President Kramer, of the Utah Fuel Co., to-day. "We will not take back a single one of the strikers so long as they are unwilling to surrender their union cards. ' ' Of course, the idea of Mr. Kramer and his company is, to break up the Union. He also fears the persuasive and un- THE WAY OUT. 63 answerable arguments union men will pour into the ears of non-union men if allowed to work side by side and he does not propose to take any chances. He wants men to be kept ignorant of their rights and power. They make better slaves. A FOREST THE ONLY COUNCIL CHAMBER LABOR CAN AFFORD. ''Scofield, Utah, Dee. 2, 1903. — A mass meeting of striking coal miners was held this afternoon in the WOODS two miles below Scofield." When they have learned to vote together, they will adjourn to meet in the legislative halls of the capital building at Salt Lake. Until then, it is proper they meet in the woods. They may depend upon it that, as long as they keep on dividing their votes between the capitalist parties they will get it in the stomach. THE GOVERNOR ''LEGS IT" FOR THE RICH AGAINST THE MEN. ' ' Salt Lake, Dec. 2, 1903. — Another conference Avas held to- day between Gov. Wells and representatives of the striking coal miners in an endeavor to reach a basis of agreement for a settlement of the strike, but after several hours' discussion the conference broke up, nothing having been accomplished. Charles Demolli, State Organizer for the Miners' Union, was present. ' ' "What do you intend to do?" asked the governor of Mr. Demolli. "Do you think you will be able to unionize the camps and keep the miners away from work until that is done?" "Yes, sir, I think so," answered Demolli. Attorneys Edler and Fozler, representing the miners, told the governor that if the State troops were withdrawn all the camps would be completely unionized within three weeks. They asserted that martial law would be preferable to present conditions, claiming that the Justices of the Peace invariably ruled in favor of the Fuel Company. During the conference Gov. Wells asked Demolli to leave the mining camps until spring at least. Demolli said he could not do this until matters were settled or he was ordered away by President Mitchell. Gov. Wells told the labor representatives that he was satis- fied the strike would fail, and continued: "I honestly believe gentlemen, that if there is much furth- 64 THE WAY OUT. er effort to secure recognition of the union and to prolong the strike the sentiment in the State is such that it will be only a question of time before men from all over the State will shoulder their ritles and go down there and run the agitators out of the State. I think you are wrong in pursuing this mat- ter further at the present time. ' ' The governor warned them against any lawlessness and turning to DemoUi with a smile said : "We will give you a free passport out of the State and I am sure the people would like to see you back to Colorado." Demolli, however, left for the scene of the strike in Carbon county. ' ' Hurrah for Demolli and his attorneys ! Take away the troops and "all the camps would be completely unionized within three weeks." Is it not clear that the mission of the troops was to prevent free discussion and not to prevent vio- lence? Biit what shall we think of Gov. Wells when he says "if there is much further effort to secure recognition of the union and prolong the strike, men from all over the State will shoulder their rifles and go down there and run the agitators out of the State. ' ' In one breath he intimates that he will approve of lawless- ness if committed by one class, and in the next, speaking of another class, warned them against it or thev might be "run out of the State. " The great intellect of this distinguished embryo statesman seems to have discovered a new judicial principle which Coke, Littleton, Blackstone, Kent and other great jurists had en- tirely overlooked. He is able to see a distinction that ought to be recognized which depends, not on the degree of lawless- ness, but on who is guilty of it. An eft'ort to secure recogni- tion of a union, if it prolongs a strike, is lawless. But it is not lawless if men shoulder their rifles and go and run tliose trying to do so out of the State. The truth was, Gov. Wells ordered the militia to Scofield because the Pleasant Valley Coal Co. wanted him to. Accord- ing to Col. J. A. Greenwald of the National Guard, there was no need of troops at Scofield. He reported "I have seen no acts of violence and no intimidation on the part of the strik- ers. It is a fact that at present there is no lawlessness. Yes- terday Avas the day for the trouble to come as the operators believed, but it was as peaceable as you please. I look for the guards to be there sometime, as the evictions will not be accomplished before the last of January and it will be neces- sary to have the soldiers there in case of trouble." According to this officer, the miners are resorting to neither violence nor intimidation, yet the State is put to the expense according to Attorney-General Breeden, of $1000 a day to perform the ordinary duties of a constable, evicting tenants upon a justice's court process. Attorney-General Breeden went doAvn to investigate the strike conditions and from his THE WAY OUT. 65 report to the Tribune of Dec. 4, one would take him to be a patriot who rides on a railroad pass and then collects mile- age of the State. This is what he says : "While there had been few overt acts, some of the strikers were inclined to be surly and to resent the interference of the civil authorities. They appear to like the soldiers, but have it in for the deputies, who they claim stopped them on the highways and were in- solent in many ways. To me (this is just what the company would say) the strike looks like an exhibition of downright ungratefulness on the part of the labor organization which is responsible for it. It looks as though the State in giving the laboring people an eight-hour day and a board of arbitration to adjust their differences deserved better things than to be caused this unnecessary, almost criminal expense of almost $1000 a day in behalf of men who were already receiving good wages, and very few of whom are tax-payers or speak the English language. ' ' The sum of what this official flunkey says is, first, there have been few overt acts, in other words they did not amount to anything. Second, the hired men were inclined to be surly, because "stopped and insulted"; third, they were un- grateful to the State for an eight-hour day and a board of arbritation ' ' given them ; ' ' fourth, troops were called out "in behalf of men;" fifth, they were receiving good wages; sixth, they don't pay taxes; seventh, they cannot speak English. Until this legal light "investigated," people were led to believe the strikers were raising merry hell down there, and troops were necessary to keep them half-way decent ; but this official says the men were inclined to be surly because insulted by guards, yet few overt acts were committed (that was aw- ful, for the men to be surly when insulted. ) Another ' ' exhibi- tion" he noticed was their "ungratefulness" for an eight- hour day which the law had given them and for a board of arbritation. (He forgot to mention that the company itself refused to recognize the eight-hour law or to arbitrate.) It seems a pretty tough charge to make against the men that very few of them pay taxes or speak English, but it is mild compared with the charge that the soldiers were sent there in "their behalf," that in their behalf the State was spending $1000 a day. I wonder if that would be news to the company and the governor? But what do you think of this? Perry Heath, Secretary of the Republican National Com- mittee and later first assistant postmaster general, whose name has been so unfavorably mentioned in connection with the postoffice rascalities now exposed and being prosecuted, but who, according to President Roosevelt, escaped a criminal prosecution because his connection with them was "outlaw- ed," at present publisher and manager of the Salt Lake Trib- une, editorially, in the issue of that paper of December 4th, and with the assurances of one sanctified, becomes the great 66 THE WAY OUT. apostle of economy for the State of Utah. He probably sees no show for a rake-off from any appropriation and extra session might make. He says : ' ' The miners can become very popular now by accepting the terms of the company and averting an extra session of the legislature." Coming from such a source, don't that .jar you? If angles ever weep, this is their opportunity. Even Mother Jones must be muzzled ! "Scofield, Utah, Dec. 1, 1903. — County and town authori- ties are on a constant watch to prevent Mother Jones from re- turning to camp. A wagon left here yesterday for the pur- pose, it is said, of bringing her back. Officers learned of the object of the wagon trip and are on a constant lookout for the female agitator. Last night sentries were on duty at all the entrances into the town. Town officers declare that she shall not enter the camp again." As I said before, it is not violence they fear, but argument. It is not because she is an agitator, but an orator; and what kind of a cause must the Pleasant "Valley Coal Company have that the civil and military pawer of the State will lend itself to shut off talk about it. Agitation always purifies. So, if Mother Jones is an agitator she is a purifier, and there is certainly something about that company or its methods that needs purifying or it would have no objection to agitation. Rev. Dr. Ross Baker of Boise, Idaho, says "it is never safe to an evil thing to agitate it. Inquiry is death to it." Corruption always avoids the light, and if there was none in that particular camp, no light could have exposed it. If there was, it should have been exposed. Anyway, the whole outfit must have felt silly, mean, small and sneaking, running around armed trying to capture an old lady whose only offense was, a really commendable enthusiasm for the betterment of the conditions of hired men. We talk of Russian tyranny, but it seems a coal company may use the State of Utah (and Colorado) for any tyrannical purpose it deems conducive to its interests, and it is all right. What would be tyranny if done in Russia is proper and lawful if done in Utah or Colorado. UTAH TAXPAYERS, REFLECT OVER THIS: "Salt Lake, Dec. 1, 1903.— Following further fruitless ef- forts to bring about a settlement of the Utah coal miners' strike to-day, Gov. Wells said in all probability he would call a special session of the legislature to provide funds for keep- ing the State militia in the field. ' ' If he does, the ordinary producers of Utah, mostly farmers, will have to foot the bill. No matter who pays it in the first instance they must pay it eventually. The coal company will THE WAY OUT. 67 pay none of it ; that is, it will make use of the strike as a pretext for increasing the cost of coal more than enough to recoup its part of the tax. So you, Mr. Producer, will not only have given your boy for a soldier to help the company beat the miners out of just wages, you will also furnish the money to keep him in the field while doing it. If these things are favors you are proud of, you may thank your tool of a governor for them. ''CORPORATION DECIDES TO MAKE REDUCTIONS RANGING FROM FIVE TO TWENTY PER CENT." New York, Dec. 14. — The statement was made to-day by a leading official of the United States Steel corporation that, beginning January, 1904, about 90 per cent of the employees of the corporation will suffer wage reductions ranging from 5 to 20 per cent. This reduction will aft'ect about 150,000 workmen in the various grades of the subsidiary campanies. The remaining 10 per cent of employees are members of the Amalgamated Association, whose wage schedule runs to July 1, 1904." "Employes of the corporation will suffer wage reduction" because there is no law to protect them and they can't help themselves. Yet, of course, the Courts will hold this to be an- other "mutual contract voluntarily entered into" beween the men and the Company, (that is, if they should be appealed to, which they will not be, because it would do no good) and not to be interfered with. It would be unconstitutional you know to do so. The Company says what the reduction shall be and the men have nothing to say about it, but it is a volun- tary contract just the same in the eyes of the Courts and law as the Courts construe it. What the Company says shdl be wages, will be wages. The men have to work for them, starve or "get," and there is no place for them to get to even if they had the money to pay fares over corporation-owned rail- roads that ^vould mercilessly rob them of the last dollar to transport them, because the law permits them to charge twice what it is worth. But why this cut in wages 1 Is it because dividends must be paid, or is it because the stock of the Company has recently gone way down and it is desired to make a showing of big profits to push it up again, thus baiting a fresh hook for suck- ers on Wall street? It's no trick to show a profit. Cut the wages and you've got it. Capitalists all understand this. The hired man can stand a cut and never feel it, he has to; but the stockholder cannot stand one in dividends, he don't have to. This dispatch shows how they do it: 68 THE WAY OUT. Philadelphia, May 28. — "Revision of the employees' list just made by the Philadelphia and Reading Railway will cut down the monthly payroll more than $20,000 and so save the company on wages about $250,000 a year. Here lies the explanation of the remarkable April state- ment of the Philadelphia and Reading, which showed receipts of $3,228,417, against $2,978,185 for April, 1903, while opera^ ing expenses were $1,784,988 or actually $82,27.8 less than the vear before." WHAT ALL THE FUSS IS ABOUT. But is it necessary to cite other instances of oppression and hardships put upon hired men? Those hired men who have the opportunity to read a large daily paper (and every hired man should read one and keep informed as to the con- ditions of hired men everywhere, because the conditions in one locality are almost certain to be the conditions in every other in time, and by reading of the troubles of others he will have a better idea how to meet his own when they come) will read of plenty more, and yet the half is never published. There is not a State in the Union or a country on earth where troubles do not come between hired men and their em- ployers, and what is all the fuss and trouble about? Why must great cities in every State and Nation and the whole country be constantly disturbed by strikes and lockouts and all their attendant distressing and ruinous consequences'? "Why are employers always arrayed against their hired men and hired men against their employers? Why is it and what is it all for? Is it possible the trouble cannot be discovered and remedied? Is it possible that among all the great statesmen of the' world, and particularly of this, the reputed greatest and most progressive nation, there is not one who is able to locale the trouble, or who has the courage to specify it, or the ability to devise a way which everybody would recognize as feasible and just, to put an effectual stop to it? There is but one cause, just one, and it is strange beyond imagination that this one should baffle the supposedly wisest men of the world to discover it and provide against it. It is strange that the people of any enlightened nation or state will serenely look on and continue to put up with dis- turbances, inconveniences, annoyances, waste of time, energy, money and irreparable loss from a cause that ought to be promptly discovered and promptly removed, and in a manner consistent with honor and justice which would, therefore, make it acceptable to all. \Vliat crisis may be eventually brought on by these in- creasing conflicts between hired men and their employers if THE AVAY OUT. 69 the solution of labo]- troubles is left to their own methods, no one can more than make a guess at ; yet it is certain the troubles will never settle themselves until financial ruin shall have needlessly overtaken millions and millions more will have needlessly endured extreme privation and suffering. It is also ertain, and the president, all the governors, con- gressmen, legislators, judges, employers and the hired men themselves must realize it, that the troubles cannot g<) on indefinitely without the danger of serious consequences to the nation. That they have got to stop somewhere, sometime, somehow. Even if left as they are now. to be settled by the contending parties as best they can, they must eventually end in disaster to one or the other or both, and unfavorable to national tran- quility; and since they so deeply concern the happiness and contentment of millions of people, they give warning of popu- lar uprisings which should arouse to prompt and effective action, those entrusted with the destinies of the nation, to avert them. It is not wise or safe to permit the disputants to "fight it out" with no law to interfere, the stronger or more powerful being permited to have its way without any regard to who is right, much the same as two angry men are sometimes permit- ted to "have it out" with their fists. Every dispute between a hired man and his employer that involves the principle of Justice, concerns the dignity, peace and welfare of the state and nation, and either, therefore, has a right, and it is its duty, to interfere with law that shall bring either party into court at the request of the other and oblige him to submit to its jurisdiction and do justice. The whole trouble between the hired man and his employer, lies in the foolish and stupid policy of legislatures and courts of trying to uphold a legal fiction. The fiction consists in treating the consent of a hired man to work for certain wages or under certain conditions as a solemn voluntary contract, when in fact he had no option but to consent, starve, beg or steal, and refusing to inquire into the facts or interfere for his relief, even though it could be shown the wages paid were much less than reasonable or the conditions notoriously unjust. 70 THE WAY OUT. WHAT THE LAW SHOULD BE. It should be the law that every court shall, on complaint being made, go behind any alleged "voluntary contract" as to wages or conditions of labor, and inquire, not only if it was voluntary, but if the wages and conditions are reasonable, and give such relief as Justice, if on the bench, would say each is entitled to. Law is needed that applies to present conditions affecting the hired man and his wages; not law that applied to con- ditions which affected him and his wages a hundred years ago when conditions were vastly different and he was virtually independent and could refuse to work without being obliged to starve, steal or beg. As long as courts go on enforcing contracts to work for certain wages because prima facie, they appear to have been voluntarily entered into, and refusing to go behind them to enquire if, in fact, they were voluntarily entered into, and if so, if they are reasonable, just so long will labor troubles continue to disturb industrial peace.. But when they do what they should do, go behind any alleged contract and ascertain the facts for the purpose of doing justice, and do it, labor troubles will begin to diminish, and finally, with all their hardships disappear. Justice can harm nobody, nor can anybody complain of it. No law can be of any possible value that seeks to supplant truth with fiction, that is, something not real — not a fact, and it is purely fiction to say that any man of ordinary under- standing, with a family to support, ever agrees voluntarily with a rich and powerful company or anybody else, to work for wages away below Avhat in justice he should receive. The fact that his wages are less than reasonable, or the conditions unreasonably hard, ought to raise the presumption that the contract was not voluntary or. that the man was a simpleton in need of a guardian; in either, of which events it should be the duty of the court to interfere. An agreement to labor that is unpist to the laborer, is one of those things that any court might take it for granted no laboring man has ever voluntarily made and, therefore, that no such agreement exists; but, if it does exist (that is, a voluntary agreement that is unjust) the court should hear evidence and revise it anyway, in the interest of society. No law can change falsehood into truth, and the theory of law that he who agrees to accept unjust wages in exchange for his labor thereby voluntarily agrees to do so, is, and ever since capital got control of the industries of the country, has been, mere fiction. It is not true. It never was true, but even if it was, the interest of society demands that every court should disregard it and set it aside. THE WAY OUT. 71 Does any court do it? No, and according to their rulings there is absolutely no law in any State that stands between the hired man and his employer to protect him from being com- pelled, if he is poor, to work for insufficient and unjust (I might say starvation) wages; and the lack of it has driven him to organize for self-protection. The rule that nothing is as sacred as human life, has an exception, which is, that the life of a hired man is noli as sacred as his pretended agreement to work for unjust wages. So says Greed, and so hold the courts. If a man agrees to work for wages he would gradually starve to death on, because it is his only show to keep alive a little longer. Greed denies his right to demand more, and the courts stand in with Greed. When the courts change front, and hold his life more sacred than his contract, in other words, treat him right, the hired man will make no more trouble. MR. FRANK A. MUNSEY, In an address before the Merchants' Club of Boston, Dec, 16, 1902, said: "Had Capital always been fair and generous with Labor, there would have been no organized labor. It was the abuse of labor on the part of capital that compelled labor to organize — to organize in self-defense, and with a manly regard for rational dignity. To a greater or less ex- tent it had been down trodden, misused, and abused for cen- E. E. SCHMITZ, Mayor of San Francisco, in a speech Oct. 12, 1903, in that city, said: "But these (labor) disputes are easy to handle, if you only show you mean to be fair and just to the wage earner. That is all he wants. Given that, he is willing to meet the employer half way and agree to settle all trouble without inconveniencing the whole eitv." JOHN WILSON, In a speech before the Civic Federation, (which is an as- sociation of employers, organized in opposition to labor un- ions) at Chicago, Oct. 17, 1903, and presided over by Senator Hanna, is reported by the press dispatches to have said: ' ' That laboring men had been compelled to strike because theyi never expected Justice until thev showed force." 72 THE WAY OUT. IDAHO STATESMAN (Nov. 13, 1903) : "This contention of nnionism is based npon the simple principle of protection. The men organize for protection of their rights." The foregoing admissions that labor is not fairly treated nor properly protected, are made by employee of labor and are given merely as examples to show what nearly everybody will admit is true whose God is not Greed. There are un- doubtedly many employers who are deaf, dumb and blind to the necessities, comforts and rights of others, and look upon hired men and women, even children, as mere merchandise and of no consequence except to Avear out their lives in hard work to pile up wealth for them. Others, and I trust they are in the majority, feel a deep interest in those they hire and would gladly welcome some plan which would insure justice to them as well as to themselves. But they find themselves under conditions which compel them to be unfair to labor in order to hold their own Avith others in the same line of business (who care nothing for their hired men except to make all they can out of them) and know of no way to change and still have an equal show with their competitors. THE WAY OUT. 73 PEOPLE WHO SNEER. It is wiser, when a serious condition confronts us, to face it boldly and try seriously to think out a way to keep it from doing us harm. It is safer to do that than make light of it, pay no attention and keep right on dancing to the music of money-getting while the condition grows, unmolsted, until finally it gets so bad it is impossible for human effort to check it or avoid its consequences. The trouble between "Labor and Capital" is such a condition. There are plenty of people who will pass over the complaint of "no work" and "poor pay" of hired men with the sneer- ing remark that there is plenty of work for everybody who has a mind to work, at good wages, and it is a man's own folly if he is hard up. In other words, they saij (I won't say "they think", because they don't) no serious condition con- fronts us but lazyness and profligacy. Well, that is what their fathers and grandfathers used to say forty or fifty years ago (and there may have been some excuse for saying it then when there were Western territories yet to be settled) and the saying has been passd along down to the present and is re- peated by those who have been so fortunate as to have never known want, and are therefore unable to see why anybody else should ever know it, although the Western territories are long since all settled and conditions are entirely different. They are perfectly innocent of even a suspicion that their own state of forehandedness is due in the least to the fact that the very class they condemn as lazy and profligate have noth- ing. They are wholly unable to see that if that class was even half as well fixed as they are, they themselves would neces- sarily have secured less for their share for the reason that the wealth of the country would have been more generally and evenly distributed among all. If the condemned class im- providently wasted their substance somebody got it, and of course it was those who now have plenty and condemn them. I may be .justified, in order to help some to catch on to the idea I wish to convey in the last parapraph, in digressing a little from my sub.ject to ask those who are quick to con- demn others for spending their money foolishly for drink, tobacco, feathers, flowers and a hundred other things and jim-cracks not necessary to life, instead of saving every cent of it and buying only such articles as they actually need, etc. Suppose all people everywhere were to take your advice and live up to it strictly 1 Did you ever stop to think what effect it would have on your business ? Or on the tens of thousands who would have to close their shops, stores, stands, saloons and factories? Or on the hudreds of thousands employed in manu- facturing and distributing the goods you think people need- lessly spend money for? 74 THE WAY OUT. Perhaps many will conclude that the prosperity they hap- pen to be able to boast of, every bit of it, rests upon the very profligacy they condemn, and but for which, they would not know which way to turn to make an honest living. Anyway, it is certain that millions now are supported by this folly and weakness (if such it is) of others, who but for it would be obliged to go about something else to live. I leave this side subject here for those Avho may wish to follow it for them- selves in as many directions as it wnll lead them. It is not true that there is plenty of work for everybody, nor is there anything like it at good wages or even poor wages, and every strike proves conclusively that there is not, because there are always plenty of idle men who, but for their sym- pathy for the strikers would be glad to get their jobs, and they often take them away because forced by their destitute circumstances to do so. The serious condition that confronts the country and must he met, is, THE WAY OUT. 75 THE DISCONTENT OF HIRED MEN. The problem is, how to stop strikes, lockouts and boycotts. It can be done only by giving the men just wages and treat- ment, and this mnst be done without doing any injustice to employers or interfering with the legal right of men to freely contract. Can this be done? Yes, but the first thing necessary is to have a clear understanding of what a man's legnl right to freely contract is. We may all agree that it is a right, but when we say legal right, we qualify it and might possibly differ as to the mean- ing of the qualification. I say no one can have a legal right to wrong another, and it makes no difference whether he attempts to do so by means of a contract or without one. Therefore, when a contract is relied on, it should be the duty of the court to inquire if it wrongs either party to it. If not, it should enforce it ; if it does, it should refuse to en- force it or reform it to do justice between the parties. No court should be allowed to turn a deaf ear to a wrong because the parties agreed to it. When courts lend their assistance to enforcing contracts on the ground that they were voluntarily entered into, without stopping to inquire if by its terms and the facts, each party gets an equivalent for what he gives, it prostitutes the law to the base purposes of those Avho are willing to make use of it to defraud others, and encourages them to do so. The consideration is the part of every contract that mostly concerns the parties to it, because it affects life, liberty, safety and happiness ; and when any of these are affected the State is affected. The obect of a contract is, a distinct understanding as to what the parties to it are to do. It is not its object to give to one of the parties some ad- vantage over the other and (on the plea that the contract was voluntarily made) a right to make use of the law to consum- mate it. The whole idea involved in the right to contract, as the law, rightly construed, looks at it is, equal exchange ; that is. bene- fits balance, each party gets an equivalent for what he gives, neither is wronged, nor would he be if the law should enforce the contract on the demand of either. The easy-going and pernicious practice of courts that per- mits one man to wrong another if done by means of a con- tract in the usual course of business, without its being con- sidered a crime, a misdemeanor or even a disgrace, has got to be stopped. They must be compelled to take a firm, bold and uncompromising stand against all wrong, whether pei*pe- 76 THE WAY OUT. trated under the excuse that it was authorized by a contract voluntarily entered into or otherwise. No contract can authorize or legalize a wrong. Such a con- tract is against public policy and void from the beginning. No consent of parties, however solemnly made, can, by any twist, turn or construction ever legalize any contract or agree- ment which, if enforced, would give one of the parties to it any advantage over the other or anything more than an equal benefit. When courts take this obviously just view of the law as to one's right to contract, there will be no more discontent among hired men to amount to an^-thing. Organized labor may disband, strikes, boycotts and lockouts will cease. No injus- tice will be done employers, and nobody's right to freely con- tract will be denied. He will simply be stopped from exer- cising a right he never had. No one ever had a free right to contract so as to wrong another, and if stopped from doing so no right is taken from him. THE WAY OUT. 77 WHAT THE COURTS MUST DO. Courts must, with an unhesitating and unflinchino; determin- ation, change the recognized rule that a man's ability to get the best of another is his license to do it, and the only limit to his right is the limit of his ability. The consciences of judges and courts must be brought up to the humiane, comprehensive and just standard contem- plated by the constitution, and enforce the doing of justice by all men to all men regardless of the ability, wealth or oc- cupation of one, or the stupidity, poverty or occupation of the other, to the end that every human being, without exception, shall be protected and really get the benefit of the rights which the constitution (of California) says are inalienably his, namely, "of enjoying and defending life and liberty and pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness." The plain object and intent of the constitution in this re- gard has been, by the courts, from a careless and unpardon- able misconception of the true and rightful scopp and limits of individual rights, in administering the law, fearfully over- look and disregard it. They have been seduced by custom and greed into the serious blunder of recognizing as an individual right, a false right ; that is, one that does not, never did and never can exist as a right, and which has led to the complete suppression and' overthrow of every benefit which the constitutional rights above quoted were intended to secure inalienably to every in- dividual. A false right, the very nature and necessary con- sequence of which is, so long as upheld, to kill and destroy the beneficence of these constitutional rights. The two cannot live together, because one is exactly opposed to and inconsist- ent with the other, so if one lives, the other must die. Up to date, as a consequence of the courts having recog- nized and upheld this false right and ignored the interes-6 which society must necessarily have in all its members, these constitutional rights have slumbered ever since they were first proclaimed. All that is left of them are words, without force or effect. How long they will sleep depends upon how soon courts go back to the constitution for fresh inspiration and whether or not they catch enough of it to begin over and place the welfare of society above that of individuals who would sink society and all who stand in the way of their schemes to get more than their just share of the products of labor. The interests of society are superior to every other interest and must be the first to be considered. Society's first concern is, and always must be, its own preservation, and it carefully provided for that by declaring in the constitution that "thei inalienable rights of all men are those of enjoying and de- 78 THE WAY OUT. fending life and liberty and pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness." But for this declaration in the fundamental law, society would have left itself wide open to be exploited, undermined and destroj^ed by the very processes which are now, with the sanction of the courts, incessantly at work exploiting, under- mining and destroying it. But that declaration, duly en- forced, will save it. Of what value is a declaration as to rights if the rights are never to be enjoyed? These rights are not enjoyed, and my object is to show, in part, why and how, also the relation which those whys and hows bear to the troubles all countries experience between what is popularly called ''Capital and Labor." THE WAY OUT. 79 THE BUSINESS RUDE. Prior to the adoption of the constitution, it was a business rule among all men that each had a right to humbug the other' and take any and every little advantage in order to get the best of a trade, bargain or contract of any kind, and no one considered there was anything wrong about it. It was "busi- ness" and considered "sharp" and smart to do so. Eveiy- Tjody expected everybodv to do it and was on the look-out for it. The one that succeeded, smiled, complimented himself and was complimented by his neighbors for his shrewdness. If he was exceptionally successful, his fame spread until he be- came known far and wide as a financier and great man, and soon all the people clamored for him as a leader and insisted on promoting him to some high political office; while other business men who had not succeeded quite so well in hum- buggery, wanted him at the head of their affairs because of his proven "executive ability," and bid a big price to get him. So that a big reward of some kind always awaited such a man. Of course, since one was rewarded and honored instead of being despised and disgraced, as he should have been, for cultivating a superior skill in trickery, it was a great incentive to all men to learn all the tricks possible to get the best of others. This business rule did not originate in California, however, nor was it confined to Californians. Nobody knows when, or where it originated; but as it prevailed wherever civilization existed, if not over the whole world, and is known to veryl ancient, it is probable that the first two of our savage ances- tors who developed intelligence enough to desire to make a trade, were the first to launch it, and of course with schemers it soon became popular and was gradually adopted by all classes, finally fastening itself upon society as a right. If what I have said is true as to the origin of the rule, it was at a time so early in the history of society that the only right thought of or recognized was, the right of the indi'- vidual. It was before such a thing as "rights of society" were thought of; that is, before the time when any one sus- pected he was under any obligation to sacrifice any personal right or interest in order to preserve the rights and interests of all. At all events, it had prevailed long enough before our constitution to become generally and thoroughly established as proper and legitimate, and it was seldom the courts ever interfered. In the course of time, however, the mischief and distress it caused, aroused society (which by this time had discovered itself and that it had rights) to try and do something to pro- tect itself, which from time to time it sought to do by enact- 80 THE WAY OUT. ing laws for the protection of its members. It did not enact laws with a view to killing the rule and wiping it out alto- gether, but with a vieAV of letting it live and restricting its operation, which it was supposed could be done in such a man- ner as to leave men free to go on taking advantage of each other in their bargainings and yet protect society. The idea seems to have been to restrain or prevent them from wi*ong- ing each other to too great an extent or in certain particular ways, not to prohibit them absolutely, and so they made laws defining and punishing such wrongs as house-breaking, for- gery, counterfeiting, embezzlement, extortion, false persona- tions and others, and re-enacted them after the adoption of the constitution, just as if it had made no mention of men's inalienable rights at all. In doing that, society made its first blunder in dealing with the matter. The blunder consisted in mistaking a great wrong for a great right and undertaking to regulate it (and it is doing the same thing yet), when it should have known that the rule was totally wrong and a wrong cannot be regulated. It is an im- possible thing to do, and the law cannot do an impossible thing. The only thing that can be done with a wrong is to* let it alone or kill it root and branch. It cannot be com- promised with. It is the opposite of right and cannot be blended in harmony with it any more than oil can be mixed in harmony with water . It is, and always was wrong for one person to wrong an- other, no matter how he does it, or how little, and no degree of popularity can make it right, nor can lapse of tim.e, nor law, nor any number of them. Therefore, when society sought to uphold the business rule that it is right and proper for one man to do wrong by getting the best of another in a trade, bargain or contract, and at the same time undertook to pick out, name and punish by law particular wrongs, which were in reality only the sum of the lesser wrongs it tolerated, it was an attempt to make a compromise with the general wrong. It was the same as saying, "it is not wrong to db wrong, unless the wrong done is prohibited by statute. ' ' The law books say, "there is no wrong without a remedy," but it is not so ; there are plenty of them which no law or court takes any notice of. They are considered beneath the dignity of laws and courts, and yet many of them are big enough to affect the security, happiness and lives of the people. Instead of specifying certain things as wrongs and pre- scribing punishments for them, society should have struck at all wrong; and no matter when, where or how practiced, or the degree of terpitude involved, should have said it is a wrong and shall not escape exposure or punishment. It should have said no wrong is too small to be noticed. "Do justice to all under all circumstances" should have been its command, "No man shall be allowed to take any advantage of another 'J^HE WAY OUT. 81 under any pretext whatever, even under the guise of a mutual contract, ' ' should have been the business rule enforced. But society did not do that. It left the strong and un- scrupulous free to take advantage of and wrong the weak and scrupulous, and to make it easier for them to do so, its courts invented the doctrine of the sacredness of a mutual contract ; the most damnable, indefensible and villainous contrivance of law for helping one man to rob and oppress another that could have been devised, and destructive of society itself. Where does any man get authority for the right to wrong another by means of a mutual contract? Does any constitution of any State authorize it ? No; it is an invention of the courts. In California the courts pretend that Section 16, Art. I, of the constitution sanctions and ratifies the old business rule that prevailed be- fore its adoption, but it is not so. They have misinterpreted that section and are doing it yet in the interest of rogaies. Sec. 16, Art. I, of the Constitution of the State of California reads: '*No law impairing the obligations of contracts shall ever be passed," and whenever a rogue is one of the parties to a mutual contract that gives him an advantage over the other party to it, he always claims the constitution is behind him and gives him a right to enforce it, and the courts say the same; but they are both mistaken. The constitution does nothing of the kind. It is ridiculous to suppose the constitu- tion includes or has any reference to swindling contracts or any contract except such as gives each party to it a quid pro quo, that is a fair exchange, just recompense, as much for as much. Any interpretation that would make it uphold and enforce a contract that wrongs one of the parties to it, no matter if it was mutually entered into without fraud, would be to make the constitution directly conflict with itself, for its general ob- ject was, and is, the protection of every man equally in his inalienable right to enjoy and defend life and liberty and pursue and obtain safety and happiness, not to deprive him of such protection. Would any court, or anyone else, say men cannot be de- prived of life or liberty or safety or happiness by means of mutual cantracts which give one of the parties an advantage over the other, or that it has never been done? It is true, men enjoy a kind of life, a kind of liberty, a kind of safety and a kind of happiness now, but is it the full and complete life, liberty, safety and happiness they should have and that the constitution contemplates? And is not their incomplete enjoyment due to the fact that they have been swindled out of it mostly by means of the mutual contracts they have entered into and which the courts have held should be enforced, be cause mutual, without stopping to inquire if they are just? Because society did not long ago set its face resolutely against all wrong, but tolerated and encouraged those men most resourceful in methods of wronging others and who 82 THE WAY OUT. could wrong the greatest number, permitting its courts to en- force their unjust contracts, thus helping- them to do it, it is to-day wrestling with a condition of industrial slavery that is appalling. A condition it is much concerned to know what to do with, and one which must be remedied or a few more years will surely bring those "sadder developments yet to come" predicted by Mr, Cleveland, and what they will be, God only knows. If industrial slavery exists, it must have had its cause, and the unpardonable and indefensible attitude of the courts which permits one man to wrong another on the plea of a mutual contract, is chiefly responsible for it. In this lies the secret of the power of great corporations to defeat hired men of every vestige of their rights guaranteed by the constitution, and they make good use of it to do so. THE WAY OUT. 83 ATTEMPTS TO CUT OUT CAUSES THAT HAD FOS- TERED INDUSRTIAL WRONGS. At the time of the Declaration of Independence, the people undertook to start the new nation off on principles broad! enoue^h to cut out the causes that had always fostered the in- dustrial wrongs men had suffered, and lay the foundation for insuring security and happiness to future generations, so they said: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." The people of California, in adopting a constitution for their government, seemed to think the language of the De- claration of Independence could be improved upon for the purpose of securing the rights of idividuals, so they said : (Sec. 1, Art. I.) "All men are by nature free and inde- pendent and have certain inalienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing and protecting property; and pursuing and ob- taining safety and happiness." In making use of these words they were evidently deter- mined to let all the world know and have no misunderstanding about it, that every citizen of the State was, and should al- ways be, free and independent ; that he should have the right to enjoy life ; the right to defend life ; the right to enjoy lib- erty; the right to defend liberty; the right to acquire prop- erty; the right to possess property, (it does not say the right to own property), the right to defend property; the right to pursue and obtain safety and the right to pursue and obtain happiness ; and that every one of these rights should be and remain inalienable ; that is, that no citizen of the State should ever be deprived of them, or any of them by any person, power or process whatever; nor could any individual by any means or methods whatever de- prive himself of them or any of them, except by dying. , Now, that all sounds first-class in every particular. A per- son would think it could not be improved upon for the pur- pose of declaring and safe-guarding these rights to every person. One would think to read it. if he was away oft' in — Africa, for instance, that every man, woman and child in that "glorious California" had a solid grip on Life, Liberty and Happiness and on the Possession of sufficient Property to make each of these things, which all desire, a certainty, some- thing absolutely secure to them and their children forever; that no matter what happened, none of these could be taken from them. But, did the members of the constitutional convention who 84 THE WAY OUT. got up that Declaration of Rights, and submitted it to the people for adoption know what they were doing 1 Did they purposely frame it to proclaim the doom of greed 1 Did the people know when they adopted it they were laying the foundation for the overthroAV and utter destruction of all the selfish rules and customs which, up to that time, had been practiced to keep them out of the enjoyment of the' rights they had just declared were inalienably theirs? If nobody had in mind this sweeping reform, this going back to first principles to secure the rights acknowledged, why were these rights declared at all? AAHiy did they not keep silent as to the rights of all and say "there is but one right, the right of the trickiest, shreivd- est, scheming liar, and his right is to get all eveiybody else has or is entitled to if he can, and keep it to mould and rot or use it to corrupt others, or corner it so no one may enjoy life, liberty, safety and happiness, except as it pleases him. That was the only right recognized before tb^ constitution, and one would think from the wording of that document that its object was to wipe it out and substitute in its place the right of everybody to have things, so everybody could enjoy life, liberty, safety and happiness, and nobody be able to cor- ner anything to prevent such enjoyment. But as, since the adoption of the constitution, the right of the schemer and liar has not been interfered with, it would seem that the rights of all were not, after all, a matter of much consequence, or else the courts have been hoodooed, they have never paid the slight- est attention to seeing that anybody enjoyed them. They have interpreted the constitution to mean that those who made it did not mean it should mean what it says, and, as a conse- quence, the one right has continued to flourish, if anything, the constitution has been interpreted to help it to flourish. THE AVAY OUT. 85 THE COMMITTEE FROM MARS. Let us suppose that some fellow, with the assistance of God, went to the planet Mars about twenty-three years after the adoption of the amended constitution of the State of Califor- nia, and took with him a true copy of Sec. 1, Art. I, (which contains the Declaration of Rights) certified by the Secretary of State to be such, over his hand and the Great Seal of the State, but not another word of information about the earth, spoken or written. That when he got there he found a strong party of Social- ists who had been laboring long and hard to get the people to adopt their ideas of how things should be arranged and man- aged to secure their rights, and they were just then in the excitement of holding- a big convention. He stepped to the platform during a lull in the proceedings and handed the chairman the copy of Sec. 1, Art. I, he had brought along. The chair, after examining it and realizing what it was, com- manded "Order!" and requested the secretary to read it aloud to the convention. The Secretary then read as follows: Solar System No. 1; Planet Earth, Western Hemisphere, United States of America, State of California. "Constitution of the State of California. Article 1. Sec. 1. All men are by nature free and independent, and have certain inalienable rights, among which are those of en- joying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing and protecting property; and pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness." The secretary had no sooner finished than the convention was in great excitement. Every member recognized at once in what he had just heard read, an acknowledgment of the principles of Socialism, and without hesitation concluded that the industrial and social relations of the people in the State of California, United States of America, Western Hemis- phere, Planet Earth, had reached that nerfect state they wished their own people to enjoy. That Declaration in their Constitution left no doubt of it, and the news flew, creating the greatest enhusiasm among Socialists ever before heard on the planet JNIars. The result of this positive proof as to the certain triumph of socialist principles on earth was, that every last socialist orator packed his grip and started out with fresh zeal to stump it for the cause. Pointing his hearers to Earth he told 8G THE WAY OUT. them of the glorious example and advanced civilization of those incomparable men inhabiting the State of California who had the good sense to declare for a government based on first principles, the very ones we have been advocating, and because of it, were able to climb out of industrial serf- dom and enjoy their God-ordained inalienable right to Life. Liberty and Happiness. "What a grand, complete and satisfying thing life must be down there in that sunny California, United States of Am- erica, Western Hemisphere, Planet Earth; a perfect Paradise, where every one is secure in the full enjoyment of these fun- damental rights, and distress is unknown. Where no one, not even the humblest, suffers pnvation. oppression, want, misery or injustice at the hands of the rich as you do here, because all live under the protection of this imperishable Declaration, which makes those things impossible. "Think of it, my friends! Think how you are constantly robbed of what your industrious hands produce ; how you are oppressed by the few plutocrats of ]\Iars — your own beauti- ful Mars — who have gradually and slyly shaped the laws and manipulated the courts until they have everything their own way. "Have they not acquired title to all the land, and control of everything that is necessary to life 1 "Do they not deny your right to everything except the driblets in wages it pleases them to pay you? "What else have you? Put your finger on one thing if you can, and say, 'that is mine clear of debt.' You know that very few of you can do it; and isn't it a shame and dis- grace to men and women of your high intelligence and un- doubted courage who outnumber and could out-vote your oppressors ten to one to longer submit to these wrongs when, by simply uniting and voting together for those of your own class, known to be such, you could so easily rout the robbers? "Why, bless you! could the shrewd and brainy people of the Commonwealth of California, United States of Am'^rica, Western Hemisphere, Planet 'Earth, who dwell in the security which this (waving above his head the Declaration) glorious and invincible document gives them, know of your stupid and unpardonable political practice of splitting the power of your votes at each election between the candidates put up by the Plutes, and whom you should know will be their willing tools to fix things so as to keep you where you are and never let you acquire any other interest on the Mars than the privil- ege of doing the work; could they know how you thus ?rray yourselves against and fight each other instead of your com- mon enemy, they would laugh at your gullibility, pity your ignorance and sneer with contempt at such of you as make pre- tensions to possessing any manhood whatever. They would sav you are wholly destitute of that spirit of greatness which always inspires those deserving to be free. "Could they talk to you they would tell you that better THE WAY OUT. 87 conditions never come to cowards ; that hope always precedes a plan as thought precedes an effort, that he who sleeps or plays when thoughts are necessary to his rights, will never get them. "No, my friends, your inaction and indifference to the in- dustrial chains that bind you to pei-petual toil for the benefit of others, when you have the strength to break them, is enough to astonish the Devil and I appeal to you again to awake, arouse, stir yourselves and cast them off. Be no longer the timid slaves of your inferiors, challenge at the ballot box their right to own the Mars or rule your lives and destinies. Put an eternal end to their insufferable tyranny and let us make and enforce a Declaration like unto this that blesses our progressive, free, independent and happy neighbors down there in the State of California, United States of America, AVestem Hemisphere, Planet Earth! (and the vast assembly arose en masse, threw up their hats and cheered. ) "The perfect liberty and security which our brothers in one comer of yonder bright blazing star now enjoy, is yours my sivindled countymen if you will only decide to take it ! "How much longer will you tamely submit to being robbed of 'the privileges and rights which God means for all men; the privilege to toil, to breathe pure air, to till the fertile soil. The right to live, to love, to woo, to wed, and earn for hungiy mouths their meed of bread'? — I thank you for your earnest attention." (The audience again arose, threw their hats and were yelling approval when a venerable Piute who had been listening got up, and putting both hands up. palms outward as if to pronounce a benediction, commanded silence.) "Air. Chairman, I should like to know what proof this Socialist has of what he has been saying. These good people have it hard sometimes in periods of depression, it is true, but so do we; still they have generally been contented with the lot the good Lord has seen fit to provide for them and I think it is very wrong for this enthusiast and disturber to come here and try to inflame their minds against the present order of things unless he has proof of a better way." Soci. "The proof is right here, (holding up the copy of Declaration of Kights from California) read this official d< eii- ment it speaks for itself. ' ' Piute. (Reads it) "I admit that a true construction of the paper should give the people of the State of California, United States of America, Western Hemisphere, Planet Earth all the rights you mention, but what I claim is that, notwith- standing the document says such and such rights belong to them, you have no proof that they actually enjoy them; "and so I say you are nothing but an agitator, a disturber and the police sliould run yon in or make you keep still." Soci. "I am indebted to the gentleman for his moderation and am pleased to note his admission that this document is broad enough to give to all the people it was made to protect all the rights I have named. In regard to his statement that 88 THE WAY OUT. I have no proof that they actually enjoy them, I would say it is simply preposterous to doubt it. No people, not even our own, and God knoM^s they are slow enough and gullible enough, with such a plain and explicit Declaration of Funda- mental Rights, would submit to being deprived of them or satisfied with anything less than the full enjoyment of them. They would fight first." Piute. "I cannot agree with you. I have had some ex- perience in political conventions that got up platforms with high sounding principles, and while I was always perfectly sincere in the matter myself, I regret to say that others, seeing how satisfied and contented the people always were with mere pledges and declarations of great principles, took care to keep the principles securely chained to the platform and never let them go any further, while they proceeded to possess for themselves the substance for which the principles stood, just as they had always done before; and as I believe human nature to be the same everywhere, I cannot think the eulogy you have delivered here on the people of the State of Califor- nia, United States of America, Western Hemisphere, Planet Earth, altogether merited. Now. as discussion is useless without further proof, I pro- pose that you act as a committee of one representing your Class and I will act as a committee of one representing mine and we will go and investigate for ourselves how much of the rights the people of California actually enjoy, which you have so confidently boasted they do enjoy. If you find things as you have pictured them, I will not only apologize for this interruption but will heartly join you in the so-called re- forms you advocate, so long as I remain on the IMars. " Soci. "That is impossible. We have no money for ex- penses. You have it all." Piute. "Never mind the expenses then. I'll stand for them and we'll go the way this imported emissary and agitator got here with that incendiary document to disturb the peace of Mars with its new notions. Is it agreed? Soci. "Agreed." The Chair. "It is to be hoped the committee will be as expeditious as possible and report at the earliest day. The audience is dismissed." Just as the Sun was quitting the Heads at the Golden Gate and dropping behind the Pacific, on the evening of August 19, 1903, the gentlemen of the committee from Mars, accompanied by their visitor and guide, the "agitator" from California, entered the Earth's atmosphere and were swiftly but silently approaching San Francisco; the Socialist smiling with con- fidence, the Piute looking serious and solemn as if filled with doubt. In a few moments, and just before the electric lights oc the city were turned on, the trio touched ground on New Mont- gomery street near the entrance to the Palace Hotel. "This way gentlemen," said their guide, the agitator, Avbo conduct- THE WAY OUT. 89 ed them to the spacious court of the hotel Avhere the stranger might imagine himself in the Tropics, because of the large palms and other vegetation that surrounded him on every side. Mayor Schmitz happening to be present, was immediately presented to "A committee from the planet Mars, your Honor. ' ' "Gentlemen of the committee from the planet Mars, it is the Supreme pleasure of my life to greet you, and as the chief executive of this great city of San P"'rancisco, I welcome you in the name and on the behalf of its contented and happy peo- ple, (at these words the eyes of the Socialist instantly spark- led with delight. The Piute looked sober.) So long as it pleases you to honor us with your presence, you are cordially invited to consider yourselves the city's special guests. T beg that you will also consider that I shall esteem it a distin- guished privilege to be permitted to render you every service in my power in connection with the object of your visit. I will have the clerk assign you apartments pud at eicht p. ni. shall expect you to dine with me, after which I will be yjleased to personally escort you through a portion of our city." Soei. "Mr. Mayor, this mark of respect you have so kindly shown us is very gratifying, and harmonizes perfectly Avith my conceptions of the character of the people who enjoy, as yours do, the inestimable blessings guaranteed by vour Dec- laration of Richts. (Declaration of Rights!, his Honor thought, what the devil can he be driving at?) At the same time I have to admit that, having lived under an economic system so vastly different from yours, and where selfishness is the motive that determines the actions of every niMu, it is hard to realize the fact that so warm a welcome is really ours. I thank you very much and assure you we greatly appreciate your kindness and hospitality." The Mayor, as he extended his hand without speaking, wondered to himself how their economic system could differ so much from our own if selfishness played such a prominent part in it. Yet it was evident from the pleased expression on the fellow's face that in some way it must, although he could not account for the gloomy countenance of his companion, the Piute, and did not feel at liberty, so soon, to be inquisitive. By shaking he only meant to say, "well, goodbye for the present," but the Socialist, in fervently grabbing it, interpret- ed the Mayor's hand shake to mean "by-Jove, that's so!" To what he himself had just said, and fancied he had found a "Comrade." The Piute only hioked on coldly and listened. There was no feeling in his shake. The facts seemed to be multiplying against him. He said nothing, and as they turn- ed to go to their rooms and he noticed so many finely dressed men and women lounging about and promenading the spacious and richly furnished and decorated halls and corridors, dis- pair and dispondency about got away with him, "what the damned Socialist said up on the Mars might be true after all" he thought. 90 THE WAY OUT. The sight of the same things, however, made the Socialist inwardly exult with triumph, while the sumptuous luxuriance of their rooms with every modern convenience to contribute to comfort, only increased the dismay of the one and the joy of the other. After dinner and lighting cigai^ the Mayor said: "Now gentlemen, I shall be delighted to go out a little with you. This is about as favorable an hour to take in a portion of the sights on Market street as we could choose and an Auto awaits your pleasure. ' ' They were both ready. The Socialist, with head and spine erect, almost strutted as he walked be- side his Honor, the personification of confidence and victory, while the Piute looked the opposite, worried and dejected. Emerging from the hotel at the Market street entrance, the rays of thousands of electric lights poured into their astonished faces, and for a few moments their feet refused to move. They stood there in speechless amazement at the be- wildering sight. Every building in every direction as far as they could see, and from pavement to cornice, was draped in lines of brilliant lights, while the street, some thirty feet from the ground, was canopied by what seemed like millions of twinkling stars that stretched away in the distance. Finally rising in the air and illuminating against the night A mighty building, with central tower, in a blaze of mellow light. It looked to them as if a section of the Milky Way might have been let down for the special accommodation and pleas- ure of this favored people. ''Wonderful! Wonderful!" both finally recovered enough to exclaim. "Ah, my God, Piute," said the socialist, "I ex- pected to find here all I pictured to the people in my speech on the Mars, but I never, nevei' thought of seeing anything half so grand as this." The Mayor, who had been noting their amazement, now gently nudged them, when they faced about and again burst into exclamations of surprise and admiration as their eyes caught sight of the great white, dazzling arch of "Welcome" that spanned Market street at Third, and the sea of lights beyond. "Piute! Piute!" shouted the socialist waving his hand to include all they saw — "these are some of the fruits of industrial freedom!" "When it pleases jon gentlemen," said the Mayor, "kindly take seats in the auto and we'll take a spin beneath this section of the Milky-way," (pointing towards the Ferry depot.) It was hard for the committee from INIars to take their eyes from the glittering show long enough to comply with the Mayor's invitation, but once seated they found their oppor- tunities to see, considerably improved and became so absorbed that they neither heard nor saw other things that would have forcefully reminded the Socialist of the miserable conditions he had complained of on the Mars. THE WAY OUT. 91 The horseless, upholstered carriage that bore them swiftly clown Market street, necessarily attracted a little of their at- tention and curiosity, but the big Union Ferry Depot that loomed up in glowing radiance straight ahead w^as their chief wonder. Alighting just as a great throng of people poured through the Ferry building from the Oakland boat, the com- mittee recovered enough from its surprises to begin to think of its mission on Earth and ask a question or two. "This is a very large and beautiful structure," said Piute, and then timidly, as a feeler, "may I ask who is rich enough to own it?" "This?" said the Mayor, "Why, this building is the Un- ion Ferry Depot and is owned by all the People." At this answer the Socialist punched Piute in the ribs with his elbow and laughed right out. (Another clinching proof that I was right, he thought.) But Piute never even smiled. The Mayor, being entirely ignorant of the object of their visit, was unable to understand why his answer made the Socialist feel so pleased or the Piute so apparantly displeased. The crowds of people coming and going made such a clatter on the cement floor, and there was such a constant buzz of voices, that it was very difficult to hear ordinary conversa- tion, so the committee from Mars only walked about, guided by his Honor, looking at the arrangement of the building and listening to such explanations as his Honor found opportunity to make. There was however a further reason on the part of the gentlemen from IMars for not pressing questions. • Neither felt very sure of his position, yet, and both had a lurking dread of ridicule should his Honor or the World know of the differences that caused their inter-planetary journey. Notwithstanding their deep absorption in the electrical dis- play, some few things had occurred within their sight and hearing or in sight or hearing of one or the other of :Uem. to both encourage and discourage each in his expectations. For instance, the Piute thought he heard one man say to • another, "damn you, I tell you that is my property, I paid for it and I will have it!" and he could not help thinking at the time. "If I heard that fellow right it sounded just as if I was at home." He had no idea though whether by "property" the fellow meant land, machinery, tools of production, or just his own personal effects, so the only point he could see in what the man said that favored his view was that, "property" in something appeared to be recognized as capable of private OAvnership, and he hoped to find that everything was, the same as on the INIars. At an other time both heard two men talking very earnestly, and distinctly heard one of them say, "the people are fools if they do not vote to own and operate the Geary street road ; the revenues will be ample to pay all the operating expenses, give shorter hours and better pay to the men, keep the road 92 THE WAY OUT. and equipment, in a far better condition than it is now. lay by a sinking: fund sufficient to discharge at maturity the bonds as they fall due and leave a large surplus to to point out the inevitable as I see it, no mat- ter how unpleasant it may be to me to do so or to laboring men to hear it. Fore-warned is fore-armed, they sa.y, and if men see what is coming, they will get ready for it. Let me ask you to look backward fifty years — fifty is far enough. What could you see then ? Were there- any but small individual producers and traders ? What became of them and what took their places? Was it not small partnerships and companies ? What was the object of forming partnerships and com- panies, was it not the concentration of capital and co-opera- tion of effort in order to be able to put up a better fight to con- trol business? Did not partnerships and companies force 146 THE WAY OUT. other individuals to form partnerships and companies or quit business because too weak to hold their own 'I "What came next ? AYas it not corporations, and was not their object a still greater concentration of capital and co- operation of effort for the purpose of putting up a still strong- er fight for business than the partnerships and companies were able to put up ? Did they not force other partnerships, companies and in- dividuals to also form corporations or quit business? AYhat came next? Was it not combines of corporations, called tnists, and was not their object a further concentra- tion of capital and effort to control all business in their line, stop all competition and have a monopoly? Well, there you have it, step by step, from fifty years ago to the present. First the individual, then the individual crowded out by the company, then the company crowded out by the corpora- tion and now the corporation being crowded out by the trust ; a steady growth of the principle of concentration and co-op- eration. And the result 1 Why the result is that instead of millions in business for themselves making a nice living, competing and keeping prices normal and in harmony with the law of natural supply and demand as of old, those millions are now working for wages for the trusts that ruined their business, and absolutely without any hope of escape until the pro- gramme changes. You have looked backward fifty years, now look forward. Can you judge from the past what is sure to come? Do you think concentration or co-operation will ever be abandoned or that we will go back to the old way of doing things? Do you expect to see the old-time blacksmith ham- mering out horseshoes, the old-time shoemaker manufacturing shoes, the farmer with flail threshing his grain or the old stage coach crossing the continent instead cf cars? No, you don't expect to see those things again, nor do you expect to see the multitude of little producers of old, taking the places of the great concerns that closed their places of business forever. Concentration and co-operation have been the order of pro- gress and their work is not finished. You know it, and expect to see them go on and on until the smallest waste in the conduct of business is eliminated, and every man has either joined a combine or been crushed. Now, if you look at it as a fact, which it certainly is, that concentration and co-operation is as much a law of business, economy and success as gravity is a law of nature, and like it may be utilized but never destroyed, then you will be look- ing into the future from the point most favorable to you to discover your best course of action to turn it to your advan- tage, instead of wasting time, hesitating to act, or in efforts intended to stay its inevitable progress. THE WAY OUT. 147 There is a way to do this and it is up to Hired Men and Labor Unions to find it, boss the job and flourish with it. with the rest of mankind, or get in the way and miserably perish while uselessly opposing it. Tell us if you can, Hired Men and Labor Unions, have you found it ? Do you now occupy a place of security and safety in the great concentrating and co-operating process that is go- ing on and rapidly gobbling the Earth? Let me ask you another question. Do you expect to dictate terms to those who own the earth ? Of course, you understand what is going on. You under- stand that a few years ago everything that was manufactured was manufactured by a great many different people wlio owned their own plants and operated independently of each other, each competing with the other for his share of the trade and employing his own agents, bosses and men. Is it that way now ? No. "What has happened? Why, a J. Pierpont Morgan went among them and explained how foolish it was to have so many different sets of men and tools to do what one set could do under one management, and save all the expense of so many and still sell their goods for the same profit. Did they see it? Of course they did, and sold out to a com- bine under a new name that closed all the old plants not need- ed and "fired" all the old employes not needed in the new arrangement. And what did they do ? They formed such a powerful combination of capital and influence, that nobody dared start up in opposition to them, and were able to control primaries, elections, appointments and the making of laws, and pollute the beach, bar, jury box and pulpit. Combines have not yet quite got absolute control of every- thing, but they are getting it, and when that time comes, the unions will be as powerless to demand reasonable w'ages and conditions of labor as a solitary individual. Why? Because, if labor strikes, the associated combines will back each other and all shut down until labor is starved into submission. They can't do it? Why not, don't they own everything? What has Labor to sustain itself but the little remnant of wages saved ? As things are now, one army of hired men is permitted to work while another is on strike, and the working army feeds the striking army, but do you think it will continue that way ? No, not any longer than is necessary to get an organization of the combines perfected so they can act in harmony and sup- port each other as did the shoe manufacturers in San Fran- cisco and Petaluma recently when the men in one shop went on a strike and all the other factories on the Bay stood by the factory in which the strike occurred and demanded that the 148 THE A\'AY OUT. strikers go back to work or all the other factories would close and throw every union man in them out of employment. That was only a small example of what can be done and will be done. THE OBJECT IN UNIONIZING LABOR. The object in unionizing labor is to place it where it can- not be forced to work on the arbitrary terms of employers. Its object is to accomplish the very end which I say should be accomplished by law, courts and juries. As the courts will not interfere to compel the payment of reasonable wages, the unions have sought to shield men from the avarice of employers by fixing a schedule of prices and inducing them to refuse to work for less. This has been quite effectual during the early stages of con- centration and organization of capital, but is it not plain that a more perfect concentration and organization will defeat the purposes of unions, if their only weapon is the Strike ? Some one has said "the lockout is as fierce and effective as the strike. Strengthened by a federation strike insurance company, the employers are bidding defiance to Unionism." That is stating the situation exactly as it will be. The em- ployers, growing fewer and fewer, as business concentrates in fewer hands, will "federate" and act as one in all matters that affect any member of the federation, and as Labor owns nothing and cannot support itself without its income of wages, it must finally yield to the federation's terms unless Society, through its courts shall interfere and say to the federation, "You are great, but Society is greater, and 'by the Eternal' you shall do justice or we will take over all you claim and op- erate it in the interest of the whole people." And, perhaps, that would be the best weapon, after all, that hired men could choose to win their fight for fair wages. It would make them equal partner^ in the business. THE WAY OUT. 149 THE REMEDY. Various remedies have been proposed for "the vexed prob- lems before the country" — as Mr. Cortelyou, Secretary of the Department of Commerce and Labor, calls the labor troubles — from "sane and conversative treatment," "sterling princi- ples of honor and fair dealing" to "arbitration" and "five acre farms with cow and pig" for laboring men in barren New England. The difficulty with all the remedies so far proposed, of which I have heard, is, none of them would be a remedy. "Fair dealing" would go to the root, but nobody will ever deal fairly unless the law of self-interest or the courts compel him to do so. Self-interest seems, so far, to be wholly against fair dealing; hence the only remedy worth trying while the competative system lasts, would be, courts and .juries fully em- po^vered and the duty made mandatory, to decide what are fair wages in every case submitted to them. ■ The five acre plan is silly, except as an expedient, and arbi- tration, unless compulsory, would amount to nothing. Labor unions are not a remedy, and never can be for the reasons I have already given and probably for other good rea- sons. To begin with, it is useless to propose any remedy unless it is founded on fundamental principles that undelie the welfare of society, and society sees it and is ready to enforce it. Therefore, I have endeavored to point out the fundamental principles involved, how they have been disregarded and the troubles that resulted. If I have succeeded, and the troubles spring from the cause I have discussed, then the remedy I propose would naturally follow, be in harmony with present institutions and as abso- lutely effective as could be hoped for, so long as competition is recognized as the best industrial system for the people to live under. Briefly, those principles are that: No man has a right to sell his labor for any price he pleases, and because lie lias no sucli right. No other man has a right to buy his labor for any price he can, and if he does so, The right of society is to interfere and inquire if the wages paid are reasonable, and if not, to make him pay reasonable wages. Society already possesses all the Machinery necessary to do this. All that is lacking, if anything, is the making of one simple law to set it in motion, and the "vexing problem" be- tween capital and labor will fade away. The law would say in substance: "All men shall be paid 150 THE AVAY OUT. reasonable wages for their labor, to be determnied by a court and jury when appealed to, ref/ardless of any agreement as to wages that may have been macle.^^ In other words, courts and juries should be authorized and required to go hehind every contract as to wages and inquire on one side into the ability or efficiency of the hired man and the necessary cost to him to live decently, and on the other, into the ability of the employer to pay, and do justice between them. That is all there is to it ; and, if the reader will keep in view the constitutional right of every man to "enjoy and defend life and liberty and pursue and obtain safety and happiness " and that his constitutional right to "acquire, possess and pro- tect property" was intended to be subordinate to and for the purpose of securing these ; if he will keep in view the right of society to preserve itself, and what kind of contracts should be treated as legal contracts (see ante, page 94, et sec, "The discontent of hired men"), I have hopes his conscience will tell him there is no hardship in this remedy of which any just man could complain. The principle that justifies the remedy is, the welfare of society. It found a partial precedent in the taking of testimony lie- fore the board of arbitration to which had been submitted the dispute relative to wages between the Street Car Men's Union and the United Railroads of San Francisco in 1903. In that case the cost of living, including house rent, pri'^e of bread, meat, groceries, clothing and many other things, were testified to on behalf of the men, also how steadily they receiv- ed work, the revenues of the company, the amount of capital invested on which it should receive a proper return, and the cost of operating, etc., the point being to prove the men were not paid enough to enable them to live decently and the com- pany, from its revenues from the roads operated by the labor of the men, was abundantly able to pay them better wages. On behalf of the company, it was relied on chiefly to show it already paid better wages than were paid in any other city in America for the same class of work, except in Montana. Can anyone see the difference between these two proposi- tions 1- One, the men, demanding wages enough to enable them to live decentl}^ in San Francisco; the other, the company, contending if it paid better wages than any other city in Am- erica it was paying enough. The men represented a principle in their demands, one un- derlying the welfare of society, namely: that they produced enough for the company so that the company could afford to pay them wages that would enable them to live decently, which, of course, the welfare of society demanded that they shouM. The company represented no principle except one antagonistic to the welfare of society, namely: its own private gain at the public expense. The company's position was, in short, that if they could get other men to do the work for the wages they THE WAY OUT. 151 were then paying, they had a right to get them and keep every dollar of profit for the stockholders. That if the present em- ployes wished to remain they should be willing to work for the wages others would be willing to w^ork for. In other words, so long as there were two men wanting the same job, the com- pany claimed it should have the right to hire the one that r-ould manage on the least pay to^ keep breath and stength enough in his body to do the work, so the company could make bigger profits. The contention of the company was only an instance of the prevailing idea among capitalists, courts and statesmen as to what wages should be, and may be stated thus: Wages should never he regulated hy what is reasonable hut always hy the pressure of competition. Recently, (June 9, 1904) the Interstate Commerce Commis- sion, in the case of the Georgia Peach Growers' Association, against the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad and others, rendered a decision in which it said: "An arbitrary charge of $80 per car imposed by the defendant, the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad Company, for the transportation from New York to Boston on peaches and other fruit shipped from Georgia points to Boston, its haul .being part of the through service between the points of shipment and destination, is un- just, and $50 per car would be a just and reasonable charge for such transportation." Of course the Interstate Commerce Commission is a court authorized by a law of Congress to inquire, complaint being made, into and to fix a reasonable charge for transportation in certain cases ; but ivhy, if it is proper for Congress to create a court with power to interfere for the protection of shippers, would it not be proper for a State to empower its courts, if they lack it, to inquire into and fix the reasonable wages a hired man shall be paid in the particular case? His wages, when less than reasonable, are as arbitrarily fixed by his employer as are charges by a common carrier for trans- portation to a shipper, and certainly he is as much entitled to potection against being robbed as the shipper. The law under which the Interstate Commerce Commission seeks to do justice between the carrier and the shipper, is founded upon the same general principle which I suggest jus- tifies a law that would turn over to the courts the job of seeing justice done between hired men and their employers. The dif- ference in effect would be that, before the ordinary courts, jus- tice would be swifter and more certain^ than before that com- mission, because a local jury would have hold of it, and em- ployers would soon learn to keep from being hauled into court by paying, at the start, wages they felt sure no court or jury would say were unfair. If they did not, and relied on an unfair contract, the jury would say so and the court would set it aside as contrary to good morals, against public policy and void. The hired man being an integral part of society and the 152 THE WAY OUT. court's duty being to safeguard society, it could not shrink from interfering with a firm hand when necessary to protect him against unscrupulous or unjust wage contracts. If hired men had a right to appeal to a court and jury and compel their employers to give them reasonable wages, hours and conditions of labor, instead of being obliged to work un- der dangerous and health-destroying conditions and long hours, and for the lowest wages which men competing with each other are obliged from necessity to take, they would feel that at last they had a way they could depend upon to settle in a fair manner all disputes and need not resort to a strike. At all events, it would be a lawful, peaceful and dignified way, and in the meantime, while a case was pending, work could go on as usual. There would be no excuse for calling out the militia or for high prices because of scarcity; the pub- lic would not be annoyed or inconvenienced by a lockout or strike; traffic would not be interrupted nor supplies cut off nor would there be any other great disturbance such as we see now. The questions at issue would be quietly tried in the usual way and both sides would submit to the decision, if for no other reason, because they would have to, the whole power of the State and Nation would be behind it. THE WAY OUT. . 153 .LOCAL CO-OPERATIVE PLANTS AND STORES NOT A CURE FOR LABOR TROUBLES. Co-operative industries owned and controlled by the labor- ing men operating them or in which they have taken stock and share the profits, including stores, have been tried in various countries and proven of great benefit to the members. There is no doubt but the co-operative principle could be extended to include every industry with advantage to those who were admitted to membership, but no local co-operative scheme or any number of them can ever settle labor troubles. Co-operation by a few hundred or a few hundred thousand laboring men would be no different in principle from one of our big corporations and trusts and would be just as objec- tionable to all who were outside of it. It would be another private concern, only with more mem- bers. Its object would be the same — profits, shared only by those on the inside. That might be a good thing for them, but not for anybody else. It would not be the complete thing. To be complete, co-operation must include everybody. Nobody must be left outside. Any plan of co-operation that includes only a part of the people, is too narroAv and selfish to bring industrial harmony and peace. Relief for a few might lull discontent but it can- not extinguish it. It might postpone the day of final reckon- ing but it would have to come after all. All the people must be embraced in any co-operative plan intended to ameliorate the conditions of all. Every man, wo- man and child must, not nominally, but actually share in its benefits. If co-operaion is good for a part of the people it must be good for all, and I submit that co-operation by a part is dan- gerous to the welfare of all. Our modern trusts, all of which are founded on the co-operative principle, are forceful illustra- tions of this truth. Therefore, I would like to say to hired men, if you go into any kind of co-operative scheme among yourselves, do not lose sight of the fact that general co-operation is better, and let your local co-operation be on the ground of expediency, the same as your strikes, to combat the co-operative trusts dur- ing the period while the public mind is being moulded in favor of general co-operation, and steadily work for that end vour- self. For my own part, I do not doubt the practicability of gen- eral co-operation, to include all the people, in the production and distribution of everything that does or ever will enter into the life of the human family. 154 THE WAY OUT. THE MOTIVE OF SELFISHNESS. CAN IT BE WIPED OUT? Nobody does anything without a motive. There is a motive behind every act. There is a motive behind selfishness. The motive is gain. The first motive of gain was a desire to satisfy present needs and it grew in proportion as needs grew and the difficulties in the way of satisfying them increased. This kind of motive and selfishness has never been considered mean or wrong. Later on, the motive of gain was increased to a desire to provide for future needs because of the uncertainty of being able to satisfy them when the time came. This kind of motive and selfishness has never been considered mean or wrong ; and, if the motive and selfishness had never gone beyond these sim- ple and justifiable desires, no harm could have ever resulted from anybody's selfishness, because there has always been enough to satisfy the present and future needs of everybody and probably always will be. But the motive of some people to gain did not stop with these desires, they soon developed wants beyond their needs, present and future, and the motive for gain grew as wants grew. Of course the satisfaction of these wants beyond needs, that is, unnecessary wants, meant that just that much had to be taken from the necessary wants of others and piled up at the feet of those whose unnecessary wants it satisfied. Now, if it would be possible in one case to trace this pile back through all those who contributed to it from their neces- sary wants, and then shift the whole burden on to one, or more according to its size, we should find at the other end that some- body, one or more, had been pinched in his necessaiy wants in proportion as the unnecessary wants of the other were satis- fied. In many cases the unnecessary wants satisfied would be found so large that if a few were obliged to bear it all they would be reduced to poverty, utterly ruined. Suppose nobody had wanted or been permitted to get more than he needed? In that case there would have always been an ample supply for everybody's needs and nobody would be ruined or even pinched; but as there never is, was, or will be a supply sufficient to satisfy everybody's wants, it follows that, when everybody is permitted to get all he wants, if he can, the shortest legged ones in the race to supply wants, will be likely to fall short of getting even what they seriously need, enough to eat. It was a long time before the motive and selfishness that made people want to gratify wants beyond their needs was THE WAY OUT. 155 considered mean or wrong, except by those whose lives had been a constant struggle to supply their own simplest needs, and late years, this class has increased in numbers so rapidly (which was inevitable), and their discontent and protests are so earnest and alarming that, "what is to be done?" has be- come a vital political problem. Has anyone a right to want more than he needs? No,, he has a right to want what he needs, but no more. If he gets more than he needs he has got what someone else needs, and he has no more right to what some one else needs than someone else has to what he needs. There is only enough on the earth for the proper needs of all. There never was at any time more than enough for the proper needs of all, nor can there be, no matter if the people number a dozen or a dozen billion. The needs of a person are not what he can get by "hook or crook, ' ' but his proper share that shall secure to him his equal right with every other person to life, liberty and happiness and an equal right to develope according to his natural ability. These are his natural and rightful needs, and whatever is necessary to him to secure them he has a right to and cannot rightfully be deprived of in order that the unnecessary wants of somebody else may be satisfied. 'Every person has a right to make the most of himself, but nobody has a right to make the most of himself at the expense or sacrifice of the right of another to make the most of him- self. The whole people (as a society) have a right to rise together that is, one has as much right as another to rise to the highest state of perfection and happiness he is capable of reaching; and the business of the whole is to see that he has the oppor- tunity to do it by protecting him, against his will if necessary, in his right to enjoy his proper share of all that nature pro- vided for the impartial enjoyment of all. Therefore, if one has ability superior to another, he has no right to use it to deprive another of any portion of his proper share of nature's bounties, and the whole, for its own protec- tion, must see that he does not do it. H,e has a right to use his superior ability to attain his own perfection and happi- ness, but when he attempts to attain his own perfection and happiness by appropriating the least of what belongs to an- other to enable him to attain his perfection and happiness, then he is wronging not only the other, but the whole, and to the extent any one succeeds in doing it, he destroys the balance necessary to be constantly preserbecl for the rise, per- fection and happiness of the whole. If one is not inclined to recognize these rights of all, society (the State), at least, must not help him to wrong others (and itself) by protecting him in his effort to acquire and exercise exclusive control and dominion over material things without which it is impossible for anybody to rise. That is, it is im- 156 THE WAY OUT. possible for anybody to rise without them or their equivalent ; and if the equivalent in the ease of most men must always come in the shape of A¥AGES, because a few are permitted to own and control all there is, then it is self-evident that the Avages they receive must always be the measure of the oppor- tunities they can afford to help themselves to rise,, the same as ownership and control of all things enlarges and measures the opportunities the few can afford, to help themselves to rise. If the policy of society is to be that a few shall be protected in the ownership and control of everything to the exclusion of all others, then its policy must also be to compel the few to make all they own and control productive, give steady or suf- ficient employment to those who own and control nothing and pay the wages that will enable them to afford opportunities to rise equivalent to the opportunities possessed by the few by virtue of their protected, exclusive ownership and control ; or, what would be the same thing, compel the payment of wages equivalent to their productive ability if they owned and con- trolled their own necessary share of everything. This is simple justice, and nothing short of the stern en- forcement of it by society can ever possibly bring permanent harmony between those who ow-n the earth (so long as they are permitted to own it) and those who own none of it, but do the work. It is the plainest fact in the world that the earth is now- owned and controlled by a very few people in comparison with the whole number of its inhabitants, and that their own- ership and control is rapidly concentrating in still fewer hands. NoAv, Mr. Hired Man, are any great truths apparent to you from this condition? Do you see that all those who own or control none of the earth must live just the same, and live on what the earth pro- duces ? Do you see that those who own and control it have a motive. and that the motive is, Profit and Power? All right, now, who do they expect to make a profit out of and exercise power over? Who but you who own nothing and must work for them in order to live? Well, now you are getting down to business, down to the actual facts of the situation as they exist and are coming, namely : A few own and control the earth, and own and control it for profit and power. All the rest must live, but are permitted to own and control nothing, and cannot live unless they live on wages the owners pay them for working for them. Do you see ? What do you say ? What will you do ? Hump your back and work harder? Of course you will. You have to. The owners have no one else to depend upon but you for profits, and they propose to make you make them. They own evei-ything and have the power to do it. THE WAY OUT. 137 Every one of them is interested in the big game of concen- tration being played aiid wants more profits to strengthen his hand. With these he buys out or crushes his business rival. It is a great battle between them for supremacy, in which one wins and loses alternately until he drops out, and the circle grows less. But on one proposition they are never at war ; they are perfectly agreed. It is that the main reliance of all for profits is, and shall be, the HIRED MAN. He is ever present, ever docile, always in their power, and a sure thing to fleece — forever. Now let us stop and sum up : Let us see what knowledge we have, if any, about human selfishness. Let us do so step by step, as we used to study arithmetic ; and, first, Is it clear that the motive of selfishness is always gain? Is it clear that the first motive of gain was to satisfy present needs; that the next was to satisfy future needs, and that those needs were proper, and therefore there was nothing mean or wrong in the motive ? . Is it clear that the trouble from selfishness began when men first began to have wants beyond proper needs and sought to satisfy them and were permitted to do so ? Is it clear that wants beyond proper needs are unnecessary? Is it clear that eveiy time the unnecessary wants of one per- son are satisfied they are satisfied out of the proper needs of another? Is it clear that that is never right ? Does any one think any person (except himself, of course) who has wants to satisfy beyond his needs is ever moved to sat- isfy them by a motive higher than the gratification of his own vanity? If so, he will please stop, look about and pick one out, ,iust one, whom he knows to have satisfied his own wants beyond needs of any magnitude, i\nth no motive other than a pure desire to better the conditions of others, and let me know. I would love to help crown such a man as a God among men. Is it clear that society has an interest in the welfare of all and a right to interfere and stop any one who is doing some- thing to wrong another? Is it clear that nobody would want anything he knew would give him neither profit nor pleasure, but would be certain to in- crease his cares and expenses — "be an elephant on his hands?" IS THIS KNOWLEDGE OR A GUESS? The motive of selfishness is gain. A motive to gain what we need is right. A motive to gain what we do not need is wrong. Society has a right to stop what is wrong. Nobody wants an elephant. 158 THE WAY OUT. ARE THESE FACTS OR FANCIES? Some people are gaining more than they need. Because of it others are losing what they need. Society (you are part of it) is doing nothing to stop the wrong. It (you help) encourages and upholds it. You have noticed the bigger a hog is, the more he is looked up to even by those he drives from the full trough hungry. They think because he is big he has a right to boss the swill, and, although all want some and could rush him and take it, they will not^ but stand around and squeal. When some see a chance to dive in and grab a little they do it, driving off those weaker than themselves with as little pity as the boss hog ever showed for them. And so it is with men. The strife among them to get their rightful share or more, goes on year after year, pig-in-the-pen- fashion, and with as little thought of justice or change of program. THE WAY OUT. 159 NOW WHAT IS TO BE DONE 1 WHAT CAN HIRED MEN DO ? I lay down this proposition for them to think about, namely : It is useless to talk of moral force as long as the gate to gain is left wide open. As long as it is possible for one man to gain something by wronging another, just so long will you find him trying to do it. Therefore, the gate to gain by wronging an- other must be closed and the only thing that can be relied on to do it, is Law. If courts were empowered to go behind wage contracts, as they always should have been, to inquire and enforce the pay- ment of reasonable wages, that would quite effectually close that gate to gain and wipe out the motive of selfishness it fos- tered, which is, to beat hired men out of reasonable wages. But, if this gate was closed at this late day, after all the wealth that has come through it and been concentrated in the hands of a few, would it be effectual to relieve the people against other great wrongs they are forced to submit to by reason of such concentration f Would they still be left exposed to extor- tion by the greed of combinations that privately own so much of the earth and its industries ? If so, laboring men, who must bring about reforms if we ever have them, should be ready to champion only those which promise to be sweeping and com- prehensive enough to give permanent relief to all classes from every form of industrial oppression. It is greed that makes employers willing to wrong their hired men out of reasonable wages, and courts favor employers because judges owe their positions to the politics they do. Wants developed greed and greed developed rascals. As wants increased, greed increased and rascals multiplied until they are now so rich and powerful they control the chief industries of the earth and force the workers to operate them on their own terms. They have done politics and fortified their possession and control with laws and courts until they rule supreme and defy the power of those who toil. They say when men may work and when they shall not. They regulate wages, fix the prices all must pay for what they consume and hold those in their employ in such complete sub- jection to their autocratic will that, if a few wake up enough to realize injustice and dare to squirm, they use the rest to put them down or drown their protests with cheers for those who systematically rob them. 160 THE WAY OUT. THE BRIGANDS. Suppose brigands infested our mountains, swooped down occasionally and carried off what they wanted, would we have any doubt about what we should do? Would we parley with them or send them sermons on morality ? AVould w^e send mis- sionaries among them to tell them how wicked it was to rob us ? To tell them they should be ashamed, reform and earn an honest living? AVould we make a speech and say to them, ' ' Gentlemen, it is all essential to the continuance of our healthy national life that we should recognize * * * the welfare of each of us is dependent fundamentally upon the welfare of all of us," and you should quit plundering? Would we waste any time in that way ? Not much ! We would say, this thing has got to stop and stop right now ; we have stood it just as long as we will; and then we would organize and sweep through the mountains, caves and canyons until we had wiped out or captured every lazy, plundering, brigand, and put him to work. That is what we would do in a plain case of that kind and we would not be divided in opinion about it, either. Is not that right? And would w^e not do it quickly? Do you think it would take us long to decide that brigands were not necessary to our prosperity and would not be tolerated ? But would it not seem funny and ridiculous to hear of a great populous country somewhere that was being plundered by brigands, comparatively a very few, and the people could not decide what they ought to do about it? Where some were always reading books or listening to sermons and lectures about how brigands ought to be good and not rob people? Where others were contending that brigands were a good thing and others that they were a bad thing ? AVhere some were ad- vocating that they should be regulated and restrained, others that they ought to be wiped out and still others that they should be encouraged and every body else given the same privilege to rob? And such discussions had gone on for sev- eral generations without anything in particular having been done to stop the outrage, except talk, and in the meantime the brigands had grown stronger and bolder and taken part in politics and got control of the Legislature and courts and were defending their plundering career as respectable, lawful and right. What would you think of the people of that great country? Would their stupid inaction amuse you ? I fancy so, and pos- sibly you would say they deserved to be plundered. THE WAY OUT. 161 THE MOUNTAINEERS. Suppose we should hear of an agricultural people living on one side of a range of mountains and a pastoral people liv- ing on the other side. The agricultural people raised only grain, vegetables and fruit, and the pastoral people only horses, cattle and sheep. In between them on the mountains lived other people who raised nothing at all,, called the Mountaineers. When the Mountaineers wanted grain, vegetables and fruit, they made a raid on the agricultural people and took it. When they wanted horses, cattle and sheep, they made a raid on the pastoral people. When they got more grain, vegetables and fruit than they needed (which they always did) they took it down to their agents among the stock men to be sold to them, and when they got more horses, cattle and sheep than they needed they took them down to their agents among the farmers to be sold to them. The stock men and farmers traded back and forth among themselves, more or less, but were unable to sell quite as cheaply as the agents of the Mountaineers., consequently the agents did a large business and soon had a great many friends on both sides of the mountains among those who dealt with them, made big profits and an easy living. The stockmen, who devoted their whole time to their herds, did not like the arrangement very well, nor did the farmers, who devoted all their time to hard work and raising big crops. The agents seemed always able, somehow, to i\x prices to suit themselves, and they fluctuated so much that neither the stock- men nor farmers could ever tell whether at the end of the season they would be able to make anything or not, no matter how hard they worked or how much they had to sell. This uncertainty in market values was so plainly traceable to the manipulations of the mountaineers and their agents that it finally became a political issue to detehmine what should be done to give relief. The regular producers of horses, cattle and sheep and of grain, vegetables and fruit, wanted the government to take hold of the matter and do something to put an end to the wild speculative methods of he Mountaineers and their agents, v>'hich they claimed was demoralizing and ruinous to those industries. They contended that "these people produce noth- ing themselves, but lived wholly on what others produce"; yet are able through their agents to push prices up or down as they please, on what others produce, and actual producers have nothing to say about it." It happened, though, that there were two political parties and each claimed to be the only reliable friend of the stockmen and farmers and to represent the only principles and policies 162 THE WAY OUT. that ever would or could give relief against the Mountaineers' system of commerce and "adequately" (whatever that was intended to mean) protect them. So some belonged to one party and some to the other. Every man earnestly believed, and with a great show of wisdom argued, that his was the only sincere and honest party fit to be trusted to do the right thing and he either wanted to keep it in power or help it to get there. All wanted the same thing, but half disagreed with the other half as to how to get it, so the vote of half alM'ays offset the vote of the other half, which was the same as if neither half had voted at all. The importance of that fact, howevc, they entirely overlooked in their enthusiasm for the success of "my party," if, indeed, they did not feel it was fully compen- sated for by the exercise of the great American privilege they all enjoyed of disagreeing with each other, and in the solemn performance, of their sacred public duty as free men, of having it officially registered on election day. Consequently, they all took what they regarded as an active, manly part in every great political campaign and loyally marched in their respec- tive party processions, each with a torch, float or flag., and whooped, hurrahed, drank, got drunk (the money of the Moun- taineers paid for the whiskey but they did not know it) fought, yelled and generally made a day and night of it ; their war-cry being : ' ' Suppress the Mountaineers ! Down with the agents I ' ' The agents, their tools, and other hangers-on of the Moun- taineers who made an easy living by their rascally methods, most of whom Avere classed as "Christian gentlemen," be- lieved, or professed to believe, that the whole system of the Mountaineers was a good thing for the country and should not be disturbed. "The Mountaineers," they gravely contended,, "are capital- ists, and the prosperity of the country depends upon capital- ists. They are necessary even to the stockmen, and farmers themselves who would be unable to get their stock and crops to market without their assistance, besides they are great con- sumers of what they both produce. They give employment to thousands of people ajid make business that gives employment to thousands more. "They are enterprising. Their system may seem hard and oppressive at times, but it keeps money in circulation and makes things lively. It is foolish and suicidal in the stock men and farmers to wish to wipe out so essential a factor in their own prosperity, ' ' and so, all of this class, always voted as the Mountaineers directed. The Mountaineers, themselves, being capitalists, nominally affiliated part with one party and part with the other for the purpose of being admitted to its counsels and help shape its platforms and nominate its tickets. Beyond that, they were independent and tied to neither, although they put up for both and stood in with the leaders of both ; depending on their contributions to campaign funds to make them solid with THE WAY OUT. 163 either administration, no matter who was elected; to see to it, with the help of the senators \vhose seats they paid for, that no policy should be pursued that would in any manner inter- fere with their free-booting schemes. As the vote of the stockmen and farmers for the two old parties always about balanced, their political influence died with the casting of their ballots and the gi'ievances they com- plained of against the Mountaineers A^rere, therefore, left to the Mountaineers themselves to pass upon, and settle. Of course, the same question was up at the next election, but "loyalty to party" gave the same result, and so it did at the next, and at last accounts the same old issue was still up, having been passed on from one administration to another without anything having been done or any prospect that any- thing would be done. , The following is a summary of the regula.r thing : The Mountaineers dictated the platforms, but let the stock- men and farmers think they did it. They actually selected all the candidates to be nominated, but managed to make the stockmen and farmers believe they selected them, so they would nominate them and vote for them. The stockmen and farmers did all the marching, all the shouting and nearly all the voting, but the Mountaineers shaped all the policies, made all the laws, executed them and sat at all the banquets and eat all the champagne dinners. Question: Have you foraied any opinion yet as to the political sagacity of these stockmen and farmers'? Or as to what must have been the shape of their heads ? Now, if some one should ask you "are there any Moun- taineers in the United States like those described, that is men who never produce anything, yet become very rich and use their money to rule in politics and shape the country's laws and policies in their own interests to exploit and oppress the common people, what would you say?" Would you say you never heard of any ? If you were asked "are there any voters who complain of being exploited by business combinations composed of rich men, yet vote the same tickets they do and trust them to right the wrongs complained of, what would you say? Would you say you never heard of any 1 Stop and think. Is it your opinion that people who know they are being robbed are wise, to keep on voting with and implicitly trusting those who rob them to make laws and select .iudges and governors to stop it ? Which parties do you see all the rich men belong to, which do they support with their money? Which do they vote with? Which do they control ? Do they support a party because they expect it to help them, or to help some one else, you, for instance ? Do they expect the party they belong to to retain the sys- tem which enables them to exploit the common people or do they expect it to wipe it out? 164 THE WAY OUT. If the rich support their party because it "stands pat" with their methods of making money,, and their methods are to make it out of the people who do the work, why should the people M^ho do the work vote for the same party the rich do? How is it, any^vay, that men who produce nothing can man- age to become capitalists 1 Oh ! I see, they speculate on what other men produce ; that is, they manipulate the prices on what others produce as did the Mountaineers and their agents and get rich doing nothing. But if one can get rich doing nothing why can't everybody? Because, unless somebody produces something there would be nothing to speculate in. It is therefore necessary that some people remain industrious and produce something before we can have capitalists. Of course, those who produce, necessarily loose all it takes to make a capitalist and the more industrious they are and the more they produce, (no matter what) the more capitalists they make and the more capitalists they make the more they loose. "Ah, I see!" says the producer, "I see how it is. "We pro- duce everything and everything we produce produces capital- ists who take it. "If what we produced had produced no capitalists then we should still have the equivalent of all we have produced. "As it is, what we have produced, instead of making us rich has made us poor because, in proportion as production increased, capitalists increased and took it. They not only took what they needed, but nearlv everything we needed; and worse still, they used it to still further head us off from en- joying M^hat we may produce." 'Exactly my friend, that is right. Your head is level, and this thing has been going on so long that most of you have come to believe that capitalists were here before producers; that is, the child is older than its father. That Capital created Labor instead of Labor creating Capital. That if it had not been for Capital, Labor, with the soil free, would ba^'e starved; that if Capital should emisrrate. nothinsr could be produced any more and nobody could live, when the truth is that if Labor should emigrate, capitalists would starve, or have to ffo to work. That if there were no capitalists and none bad ever been tolerated, the wealth they now call theirs would be equally distributed among those who worked hard and pro- duced it; and if those who produced it had even what the capitalists have taken that they do not need, they would all be well fixed. Take Mr. Carnegie, for instance. How much better off the men would be who earned the millions he is trying to give away for libraries if they bad been paid the value of what they earned at the time they earned it. Whose money is he trying to give away! Even now. if he would hunt up the men who earned it and give back some of it, would it not be a far more righteous act THE WAY OUT. 165 than giving it to people who earned none of it? li he did jus- tice in that way, how much would he have left to buy castles with in Scotland, or libraries? I once overheard a foreigner ask an old settler this ques- tion : ' ' How is it, have you any brigands in this country 1 ' ' The answer he got was, "of the old sort, no," but we have corporations that can discount them and win. I assure you stranger that it would be impossible for an old-time brigand to compete with them and feel sure of a living. ' ' I have often wondered since if that foreigner caught on to what he was driving at; of course you see if? Now let me ask you, Mr. Hired Man, ]Mr. Producer, why have speculators and capitalists who never produce anything, but live on your labor, been tolerated so long and why are they tolerated now ? Is it for the same reason that the stockmen and farmers tolerated the Mountaineers? They did not mean to tolerate them but voted with them and therefore, for them and so never got rid of them. What are you doing? Suppose the stockmen and farmers had become class-con- scious ; that is, realized that they did not belong to the Moun- taineer class, but belonged to a separate class, the producing, industrious class, and had formed a. party of their own, voted together and filled all the offices with men of their own class. What then ? Suppose you should do tliat? What then? Some one will say, ' ' they would have sold out and so would you. ' ' No you would not. It would do no good. Why? Because you would adopt the Initiative and Referendum system of legislation and the Imperative IMandate which would put an effectual stop to boodling and all that kind of business. Why don't the old parties you vote with now adopt those measures ? Because that would close a hundred gates to gain by which they rob others, and the capitalistic schemers who run the old parties do not want them closed. ]G6 THE WAY OUT. SHALL YOUR CHILDRIEN BE MASTERS OR SLAVES? Think of this. If a few men may own the earth, what hope have all the rest that their sons and daughters can ever be anything more than wage slaves? Is that a nice fate to think of for the handsome little ones that now rnn to meet you and climb up on your knees when you come home from your work? If it is possible for you to figure out any other fate for them under the present system, do it. AVhat has been your fate 1 What are you now? Are you satisfied ? Are you sure of your .job or Avages ? Would you like better conditions? Would it seem good to be able to feel sure of always having employment at wages that would enable you to support your- self and family properly, giving them the advantages they ought to have. AVould it? Would it make you feel good to know your sons and daugh- ters will be certain of an opportunity to earn a good living when they grow up and never need worry so long as they are willing to do their share. AVould it? Well, if you would like that change, do not be so foolish as to expect those who now make a profit on your labor, to ever try to bring it about. Your capitalistic masters will never emancipate you or your childrpn as long as they can make a profit out of your labor or theirs. You must emancipate yourself or you will never be emanci- pated ; nor can you do it yourself until you break entirely away from the old capitalistic parties and go into politics on your own account with a party composed exclusively of your own class; that is, of toilers, like yourself,, with not a single capitalist in it; for if he gets in, he will only be a wolf in sheep's clothing whose object will be to perpetuate the profit system. Then, your party must stand for i-eforms that shall give the earth back to the people. Labor has always footed the bills of o'overnmont. does it yet and certainly has a right to see that the goveiTiraent is conducted on principles conducive to its interests, which it has not been. It has been a government by capitalists, for capitalists and will be until Labor shall capture and control it. Why haven't we had a Panama canal long ago? Because the railroads did not want it. Why haven't we had postal savings banks? Because private savings banks did not want them. Why haven't we had a parcel post? THE WAY OUT. 167 Because express companies did not want it. Why has an income tax always been defeated? Because the millionaires did not want it. But it is not necessary to specify, you already know all these things, but do you know why capitalists are able to do them? Do you realize that you helped to put the power in their hands when you voted one of the old party tickets? Do you think they care which is elected, Mr. Roosevelt or Mr. Parker, since both stand for the conditions they want? Will they put up any campaign funds to help elect Eugene V. Debs, the Socialist candidate for president? Why not? I do not urge the labor class to unite and vote wnth a party composed of their own class to capture the government and offices for the purpose of wronging the capitalist class, but for the pui-pose of stopping that class from wronging them. Power to rule should be lodged in hands that will use it to protect the masses instead of classes. Do you know what you want? Unless you do you may vote wrong. A vote is force,, and if you vote for what you do not want, you use the force of your vote against yourself. We have been and are now living under the capitalistic system ; that is, a system where everybody is hoping and try- ing to be a capitalist, which you know is impossible under the competitive system, and the few who get there live off of the industry of the millions who do not, Now% are W'e silly, or are we not, in continuing to want that system and keep on digging, making slaves of ourselves to support it and those who profit by it when we know it is out of all reason that it will ever come our turn to be cap- italists ? Is it not better to stop now than to go on slaving and wrong- ing ourselves and everybody else, only to finally fail and die? There is only one way we can all be capitalists, one as much as another, so none will be extravagantly rich, none miserably poor and no failures; so eveiy life may develop to its best and enjoy its rightful share of nature's rich gifts; and it would seem that the "Common People" would much prefer it to the present uncertain, worrying, grabbing life. What do you think of it by this time anyway? How much have you succeeded in grabbing? How much nearer are you now to being a capitalist than you were when you started ? Do you want to continue the corrupt system you have bucked against all your life and leave it for your children to buck against? Or would you rather swap it off for one under which all would be capitalists ; one where it would be impos- sible for men wdth less conscience to get rich by doing things you would scorn to do? Think about that! If you are still determined to hang on to the present sys- tem and wish to continue the struggle against such odds as 168 THE WAY OUT. the Coal Trust,, the Oil Trust, the xvleat Trust, the Flour Trust, the Sugar Trust, the Railroad Combines and a hundred others you daily pay something to support, you want to be sure and vote one of the old party tickets — it does not matter which, but if you do not, and would like to get into a com- bine of your own, one in which you and your children will get just as big a rake-off out of the manufacture and trans- portation of things as Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Morgan, Mr. Could, Mr. Harriman, Mr. Hill, Mr. Baer, Mr. Spreckels or any of the other millionaires or their children, you must loose no time in getting into and voting with a party of your own class; one that stands uncompromisingly in favor of the people owning and operating on their own account,, all things. That is your hope and only hope of escape from extortion by privately owned monopolies. That is also your only hope of saving your children from the certain fate of having to work all their lives at beggarly wages for those monopolists and other profit takers. If you help your class to bring about that reform, the children of the present generation of millionaires (there will never be any more) will stand no better show for the enjoy- ment of Life, Liberty, Security and Happiness than your children. If your children must work for wages under the new system, so must theirs. How would you like to bum oil and coal from your own wells and mines at the cost of production? How w^ould it suit you to get meat, sugar, shoes, etc., with- out having to pay a profit to a private monopoly or any body else? Would it seem nice to ride on your o"\vn cars, finished as good or better than the present Pullmans? Would it not seem nice to use your own gas and electricity supplied at cost, and pay water rates to yourself? Think of the fine schoolhouses, good roads and beautiful public parks you could build and many other things you could have with the profits you now pay to private individuals who spend it in building million-dollar mansions, parks and drives for themselves? Think of the long rides you and your family could take and the sights you could see for the bare cost of it, under a Co-operative Commonwealth ? Think of how many more men and women would be em- ployed to better eveiy branch of the public service and les- sen the danger of accidents, and that they would be paid by money that formerly went to pay extravagant salaries to use- less private officials ? Think of all these things and many others you would ger the benefit of by virtue of public ownership, and then decide if you wall vote to have them or stand by the old parties, let the capitalists continue to skin you and never get them? Concentration and Co-operation is perfectly natural and right and can never be stopped. THE WAY OUT. 169 The thing to do is to shift it from private to public use and benefit. Now is the time to "take the bull by the horns" and do something. Do not let an election pass without using your vote to help force a change — not from one old party to another, but to a party that stands for those things. Your vote will not be wasted even if it does not bring it now. It will be wasted if you vote for what you do not want. A Co-operative Commonwealth will not be likely to come all at once, but it will come. Everything that is privately owned by which the public is robbed, is a gate to private gain at public expense and it must be closed and closed as quickly as possible. Every time one of these gates is closed, a motive of selfishness is destroyed. The Capitalist System is the Profit System and is supported by a single prop. \ The prop is, Profits on the Labor of Others. Knock it out and the system goes down. Capitalists will never do it. It must be done by the men they rob, and THE WAY OUT is, that way which will knock it out completely. The substitution of PUBLIC OWNERSHIP of the MEANS of human existence for Private Ownership of those\ means, will do it. Nothing else can. Then, all men would in fact enjoy their constitutional, in- alienable right to LIFE, LIBERTY, SECURITY and HAP- \ PINESS. \ 4 i 4 V- THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY I —■ ■^ T his book is DUE on the last date stamped below WIT I Form L-9-15m-2 '36 VNIVEK^- RNIA A' LOS ANGELES LIBRARY A ^^- REMOVE THIS BOOK card; ^X\iLIBRARYQ^ r- University Research Library --l^