A labor catechism of political economy. A study for the people. Comprising the prinipal arguements for and against the prominent declarations of the industrial party requiring that the state assume control of industries

Front matter

'■life*'

m

: p

Preface

condition of utter slavery, in which Labor helplessly lies, before his own prejudices gave way to the truth. Experience has taught him these opinions. He only asks that others do the same.

There is also an opinion that Americans will not organize themselves, and take questions here treated, in consideration. This is a mistake. But the Americans organize differently from all others. They organize by Party. Party is based upon PRINCIPLES. Principles must be discussed. Consent must be first achieved through the bold, and thorough canvass of these opinions; and organization will be the least source of trouble. The Author's life work will be accomplished, if his books and lectures aid in arousing the American mind to take up the consideration of these great Principles from their depths; believing that collective opinion will do the Test well, in the cause of the enslaved. He claims only consistency, in unwaveringly maintaining the Pkinciples explained in these chapters; believing them alone, the Basis of the true Labor Problem.

Having suffered for this course, at various Conferences and Conventions, and for sinking the ambitions of men, through abiding faith in these fundamental TRUTHS, and outlived much of the obloquy which decried his lectures, he feels an especial pride and joy, in seeing these night clouds now break and scatter, one by one, before the ineffable dawn of a day of Economic Emancipation.

Introduction

The coming subject of discussion and agitation among the people, and especially the Laboring People, is to-day, the same which has been more or less discoursed in private and in public, ever since the dawn of the philosophic age of Greece.

How much do men know? How much are they capable of knowing? These questions were asked by Zeno, by Socrates, by Aristotle, nearly four hundred years before Christ. It was denied by some of the sages of those times that man was capable of positively knowing anything. Aristotle said that the only method man could take, by which to arrive at an unmistakable knowledge of truth, was by beginning with small things; by investigating through comparison, reason and analysis; by beginning with the least and working out to the greatest ; leaving nothing neglected, nothing unstudied, nothing which investigation had not wrought some brilliant of truth from, or added some hitherto unknown gem to the diadem of knowledge. The question is the same now but more pointed. How much political economy do we know"? Can men take mutual care of themselves? However much, the world has repudiated that old doctrinal question of the great philosophers of Ancient Greece, it is plain to every one who reviews the methods of the world's moral and mechanical development, that progress has ever followed, and is still following the lesson given by them. The mind of man is evidently still in its infancy ; and it seems susceptible of growing ripe and rich, only as it attains these separate auxiliary gems by the light of each successive investigation and experiment. The true secret of advancement lies in an instrument. This instrument is mechanical. With it the unpolished mechanic is moving the world. He is at the helm of mechanics. There is not a science that does not develop from mechanics. The figures of Leverier were useless without the accompanying telescope and pen. The glory of the nineteenth century is due to the invention and application of steam, of the telegraph, of the printing press, and of a thousand other forms of mechanics.

Now the application and diffusion of these instruments of science, of human knowledge, is just that which is maldng the world wise; and the happiness of the human race does, and ever must depend upon the wisdom with which these mechanical instruments, mostly the product of the humble worker, are applied in the production and the distribution of our means of life and development. Tne merest tyro may, therefore, see that this is political Economy, in its widest and most practical sense.

This ancient plan of research and investigation, by both theory and experiment suggested by Aristotle, led to the establishment of great laboratories, museums and libraries at Athens and in Egypt, three hundred years before Christ;

and nearly all the inventions, charts and books in the world had to be collected into small compass, in order to attract the attention of scholars, while the g*reat masses of the people scattered over the world, were not only without their uses, but were, ignorant of their existence.

The world's subsequent labors reversed these conditions. Now, all such instruments are diffused: scattered over every part of the civilized globe ; and the people are using ihem.

In those days, it was easy for an ignorant adventurer to send his brutal squadrons to Alexandria, and destroy those invaluable specimens of books and invention, of which no duplicates existed. Now, every individual specimen of either book or mechanical appliance poscsses hundreds, perhaps even millions of its kind; and thus the destroyer can no longer annihilate them because they are in actual use, throughout all the lanes of life.

The subject of discussion, therefore, although similar to that of more primitive ages, varies in its almost infinite diffusiveness. The ancient asked how an instrument of human knowledge and development could be made. Curiosity and desire of self culture, brought men from the antipodes to see it. The modern, seeing the instrument constantly before him, asks how it shall be applied to use. What is the wisest method of applying all this science, art, invention, so preeminently capable of producing the necessaries of human existence, and of producing them with such marvelous rapidity? What shall be, in future, the control or management over them ? Shall the labor-saving instrument be amonopolizible thing? Must our potent sciences, enveloped in wealth, woven with railroads, electric instruments and lines of steamers, busy with factories, farms, literature, be forever operated by the same narrow, competitive process that the comparatively ignorant ancients used ? Must it still do in our age, when they have multiplied by millions, and have diffused themselves to such a degree that the eye and the ear encounter them at every turn? Among the ancients, the isolated family, the individual, the competitor, were the only source of government recognized, as applied to the manipulation of labor and its products. All things ruling outside the labor societies, were operated from a central principle of competism. Every kind of business had a conservative character. The tendency was constantly to aggregate. At the present day, the constant tendency is to disperse ; and humanity becomes diffused, in a direction of levelism.

Is the competitive principle applicable then, to modern humanity ? The competitive system was natural to the ancient mind because religion was exclusive, and favorable to individualism. The family was a world by itself. Over it the father held supreme power. He could punish his wife or his child with death. Back of that monarch — the ancient family despot — there was no appeal. From the family arose phratries, tribes, cities, nationalities, modeled from the same ignorant and bigoted usages, and consequently establisae:] tinder the same despotic regime. Jealousy, self-love, and many concomitants of absolutism, and competitive rivality were quite natural, even consistent with a public opinion which such a state of things produced. But Christianity, it is said, broke the pagan religion down. Why then, does the competitive system still hold unlimited sway? The competitive system of control is natural to individualism and human selfishness ; yet the race is drifting, by the light of science and its instruments, into liberalism ; and governments are becoming democracies or republics. Why then, should the control of the scientific labor-saving instrumentalities so infinitely more diffused than those of the ancients, continue in the hands of individualists? If governments, which were manipulated by competing individuals in ancient days, have changed from the despotic to the democratic form, why may not the control of the people's industries be also relatively changed from the despotic, or competitive, to the democratical form ?

Public opinion must bend to knowledge; to demonstrable truth. It cannot always remain the poltroon of a monopoly-hugging, competitive system, however delusive its inculcations and natural instincts. The control and ownership of production and distribution tend to escape from the bauds of the individual, and to be assumed by the people themselves ; and this variation of its control, and ownership must keep pace with the variation of the form of government, from the despotic to the democratic.

It is a mistake to suppose, that there ever was a time when the people of Greece and Rome could have enjoyed a votive franchise and elected their own choice of men to control politics. The popular idea is, that they did ; but this opinion is derived from the fact that those ancient governments were called republics. Research into the truth reveals to us, howver, that magistrates, — who were religious priests, by a rite of the ancient religion — used to consult the heavens at night, in search of the will of the gods, concerning the eligibility of candidates ! The people were too unenlightened and superstitious to see these tricks of priestcraft; and it often happened that an unpropitious star, meteor, or phosphorescent light was interpreted by such priest-soothsayers as unfavorable omens against the favorite of the poor majorities who, on the day of elections, felt themselves obliged through their own religious superstitions, to vote against their free choice, and were thus duped.

The best and most democratical governments the world has produced are these of our own. Political control is rapidly outgrowing despotic control. The mind of man has, since those days, changed from the exclusive ideas that led to concentrativeness, into ideas of fellowship, which lead to business co-operaticn, joint management, republicanism.

By whatsoever the present generation has developed, through the repudiation of religious superstitions, the inroads of mechanics, public schools, postal bureaus, galleries and museums of art and science, and general enlightenment, •which all come from the errors of the past, as well as the successes of the present, and the hopes of the future, by just so much is modern Government better than ancient. Yet notwithstanding all this, there has scarcely been a jot of improvement in the control of business, which produces the means of existence and of happiness of the millions, for whom these governments are made ! There has been much political and scientific growth, but no corresponding economic growth among the proletarian classes.

Out of this mechanical enginery, produced by the study and toil of working people, we see much social improvement among the wealthy and medium portions of community, yet nothing but degradation among those whom society persists in making no provisions for. People still refuse to control the making and distributing of their life-means, on the mutual principle that has succeeded so well, when applied to political and judicial government.

It is the author's belief that it is as possible for any enlightened people who possess such means for facilitating Indusrial Economy, both in production and distribution, to govern their economical methods of labor, as it is to govern their political methods of law-giving. The people of this country make their own laws collectively. Why should they not make their own bread collectively ? They can agree so far as to elect representatives, and send them to Congress and Legislatures, pay them for their work, watch over their actions, study and criticise their motives, approve and accept, or censure and repudiate the laws which they create. Why cannot they, also, elect representative men to take control of theii cotton mills, instead of leaving this important branch of supply forever in the hands, and at the caprice of irresponsible individuals, without the least improvement (except in mechanical instruments ) upon the methods that prevailed in the days of the clesaes ? Political government has become democratical. Why is mechanical government still monarchical ?

These thoughts lead us to ask whether it is possible for the mechanical, or more properly, the economical affairs of mankind, to be assumed under a democratical or communistic form . But we do not reflect that this same question once was asked of republicanism, or government by the people. There now remains no longer a doubt of the perfect capabiity of the people to govern themselves. Every

experiment proves it. Every new republic acts as a purifier of human intelligence, and the plan is growing more popular every year throughout enlightenment.

But has the plan of a democratic administration of our economical and household affairs ever been submitted to a similar collective test ? Certainly ; and on a vast scale ; and by the government ! Nothing can be more intimately connected with our household, our private, and our business matters than the business of the great Post Office. It is a natural part of the people's business which political government adjusts; but it is intimately related to our economical means of producing and enjoying the means of life. It is so vast that it cannot be operated by an individual.

Besides, the people, collectively, are eternal ; while as individuals, they are fleeting. Individual, and even joint stock enterprises, however large and prosperous, are fleeting and perishable. They owe their present, and their future to a man or to a certain set of men who, while they live, are the supreme rulers of their industries. Thus the people are supposed to have no right to question arbitrary dispensations ; because they are beyond their collective control.

The reverse is the fact in regard to all business enterprises which are the undertakings of a state or government. Although any individual, be he a private, or a ruler, may die, yet the collective individual, the great Body Politic, never dies. In the modern form of elective republicanism, this mutual collectivity is not only eternal, endowed with a constantly self purifying tendency, but it is supreme in its control. This collective control dispenses the laws. It operates from year to year, all the vast practical business as well as theoretical functions of a great government.

Auxiliary to this government is the Post Office. The Postal Department grew out of, or rather out-grew a joint stock company. While a company carried the mails of the nation, the people were supposed to have nothing to say; they were obliged to submit to paying prices for their letter carrying service, such as in these days, would be considered insufferable. Gradually, however, the people have assumed this business. Instead of the old monarchical form, this business is now conducted under a democratical form ;

and experience has made it very dear to the people general" ly. It will be shown in these chapters that it is yet far from being perfect ; but it is made to answer the purpose very well until we are enabled by our own experience, to see light more clearly.

The public schools furnish another important instance of the application of the principle of democracy to the practical uses of great masses of people by the collective, instead of the individual control . This institution is democratical and a reverse of individualism in principle; however imperfect its details may be, owing to ignorance of the people who control it. It is an institution which is rapidly assuming enormous proportions. It is so democratical that it educates the poor man's child with the rich man's money; and this collective power, the people find , is a safeguard to the perpetuity of their democratical form of government ; because it develops one of the most important resources of national prosperity and happiness — the intellect . It is impossible to compute the immense importance of this intellectual developement, to a nation.

When the people, as a collective unit, have grown, by experience, in appreciation of this importance, they will doubtless convert the public schools into colleges, with preparatory and graduating departments ; and make them vie, in every respect, with the noblest colleges of the world. These schools are controlled by the people in common, who have already established laws in some states, rendering it compulsory upon the children to attend. The public school is a vast business undertaking of the people, who by their votes and labors, control it collectively; and through it, the monarchical idea of business control, is being effectually expelled.

Still another important example of the growth of collective over individual control, is seen in the system of hospitals and dispensaries. The reason of this steady growth is, that the public are more careful than the household, of the sick. Experience teaches that a private house, even if it be a home, is a poor place to take one, afflicted with a contagion ; and altogether the wrong place for the sick generally. The public are also becoming aware that a great wrong is being practiced upon them by druggists, who, in collusion with doctors, exact exorbitant prices for medicines ; and especially, for the prescriptions of these physicians. The continuous tendency, therefore, of the public, is to supplant this ancient system of the individual, by means of which he exacts large private profits, with public hospitals and dispensaries.

These institutions are maintained mostly by appropriation from Congress, Legislatures or municipal government, over which the people preside. They are consequently, democratical ; and the people make the management of them, a legitimate subject of discussion and of political action. Thus people are forced into the supervision, economical as well as medical, of their own sick and suffering. The people, in common, are learning to take charge of themselves. They must, in the logic of such a system, be constrained to do it well. They must make the noble and growing dispensary, a home. The idea that these institutions are eleemosynary in character, and that, to frequent the dispensary for medical service is akin to beggary, and therefore degrading, is false and foolish. It does not belong to sober business economies. "Not does it savor of sound judgement. It is an idea based mainly upon vanity. The people make the dispensaries. They own and control them. Is it not respectable then, for them to enjoy that which is their own ? These carpings at mistaken respectability, are unbecoming the sound judgement of a great public.

They have almost entirely outgrown this vanity in its application to the public school. Why should they not be equally dignified in patronizing any other common interest ?

It is the often expressed doubt of many whether the true theory of democracy will, when submitted to a whole people, with all their contrarieties of thought, their conflicting interests, their love of amusement and flattery, and their general ignorance, stand a solid and practical trial. The pessimists in political economy and governmental advancement, are dismayed by the popular and increasing clamor that surges and roars on every side, bitter with accusation of malfeasance in office, and convicting by scores, the chosen representatives of the people. To all such doubters the world is better prepared to-day, than ever before, to make an agreeable report in the affirmntive. The indications are, that this democracy is successful, so fir as its theory has gone into practical trial. The dismay caused by the conviction of a defaulter, need not discourage us. Tiie fact that individuals are often caught and convicted, does not prove that, under more ancient methods of government no such rogues existed. On the contrary; it proves that under the democratical system, the people are anxious to see the corruption of their representatives exposed, and criminals punished. This was not the case under the monarchical system, where one man, or one set of men, held perpetual control.

The consequence is, that the business of ferreting out rogues has become popular and lucrative to many persons who enter upon it. The people are honest.

They want to know the truth ; and will reward, by their patronage, any one who will furuish them with it. This has created of late years, an enormous newspaper business. It has also occasioned the modern incentive to writing books containing the opinions of individuals, concerning true principles of political economy, regarding statistics, and examples. The same popular craving after the knowledge of the truth, is what makes oratory successful ; and thousands of good public speakers are kept busy, canvassing the relative capacity and honesty of the people's candidates. All these efforts shed light upon the inner qualification of the aspirant, and the office holder. No amount of labor or expense is spared to enlighten the people concerning them.

The fire that illuminates the prairie, crackles loudly as it burns, and purines the ague swamps ; but it is the loud crackling that dismays the timid one. He will not open his eyes to see the light. If he wrould, he would see the miasma disappear, the dark forms of public robbers lurk away for safety. He wTould seek to have them caught and brought to trial. In old times, and under less favorable systems, these robbers prowled and glutted themselves, upon the people's accumulations unmolested. Indeed they were sovereign. There was no light to expose them. They held the masses in subjugation. In modern democracy, the reverse is true ; and as the light of honest truth is requisite to collective prosperity, the public will pay for it. The great newspaper is consequently assuming the function of the censor, the tribune, and the lictor. Humanity may rejoice rather than he frightened at the result !

Nine in eleven of all the individual enterprises of this country are, by statistical count, known to end in failure.

About one half the joint stock companies fail. But in relief of this, four fifths of all the government enterprises succeed. These cardinal facts alone, are sufficient to embolden the advocate of government employment, or the employment mutually, of the people, by the people, for the sake of the employment and the product, rather than for the sake of profits to a con tro ling few.

If nine out of eleven of the individuals who venture time and money upon business enterprises are found to fail, it is time to doubt the capacity of an individual to conduct business at all. It is also time that the people, who must be supplied by some means, should begin to cast about for a method that will be more successful. Why does the individual so frequently and so ingloriously fail ? Is it not because he lacks the requisites of means, of judgement, of tact, that are indispensable to success, and if so, do not a large number of individuals, say a nation of people, if they can come to terms of agreement, possess just these various requisites of money, of jndgement and of tact, that would ensure success ? It is doubly evident that they do ; since they also possess the labor, which they always prefer to sell to themselves, rather than to others.

If one half of the joint stock company enterprises of the country, that are undertaken, prove failures, is it not high time that the great masses who most suffer by such failures, by reason of the dearth of employment, the financial depressions, and the demoralization they create, should launch out upon the study of a method that will add better factors of success ? And does not the fact that a larger percentage of enterprises under the direction of companies succeeds, than under the direction of an individual, prove that the factors of success in business lie in the variety of requisites which numbers furnish f

There is always one danger which the masses have to fear from corporations ; — that which has given expression to the maxim, that " corporations have no souls." Yet this selfishness that makes so cruel a saying true, is undoubtedly just, as applied to the welfare of all the members of that corporation.

What a powerful argument, then, does this black maxim furnish, in favor of augmenting the number of the company in control, until it includes the majorities of the people \ The reason why the corporation has no soul, is because the business formula of rules, and of discipline, governing, and agreed to, by that body, render it possible for the individuals to shirk moral responsibility.

Business rules are inelastic and void of conscientiousness. Individuals are not. The individual operates a business for himself, and fails nine times in eleven.

The joint stock company runs a business for itself, and fails five times in ten. No one will deny that each individual engaged in these enterprises, is actuated by motives of self interest. But what makes a number succeed so much more frequently than a single person ? The answer is easy. It is because, in a number, who understand the principle of agreement, there are more factors of success. There is more capital and a greater variety of talent, which, is requisite to the well-being of the business. If there is agreement, there is certainly a number of individuals, each with his peculiar aptitudes of business tact, and pecuniary means. This is evidently the reason why the joint stock companies succeed so much more frequently than the individual, who has only his own resources, and is often devoid of experience. The whole argument, then, suggested by these statistics, shows that there can be no danger from this augmentation of the numbers engaged in an enterprise, even though this number include the entire people.

First, because collective ownership and control dissipate, effectively, the danger mentioned, regarding the soullessness of corporations. The corporation works only for the interests of the half dozen individuals who form it. It is gruff and heartless to all others.

The people's collective enterprise is equally selfish ; but it includes the entire people, and consequently must consult the welfare of all. Secondly : admitted that it possesses elements of agreement, it certainly possesses all the factors of variety of talent, of adaptiveness, of aptitude, of genius, and, not the least among its indispensable requisites, it has means, and labor of its own which it prefers to appropiate to its own business rather than sell to others.

If four fifths of the government enterprises succeed, does it not show that agreement is a possible thing ?

It is possible for joint stock companies to enlarge their numbers so as to include, not only a dozen, or a hundred thousand members, and agree so perfectly, as to perform the most difficult functions of business ;

both legislative and mechanical. It may be said that co-operation of large numbers, instead of the joint stock companies of a few, is a new thing in the world : and therefore, a precarious example to judge from.

Not so ; for if we are to believe the history of Christ, and his apostles, the co-operative principle was carried into operation successfully ; and further, that it assumed so radical a form, that not only labor, and the product of labor were held, distributed, and enjoyed in common, but the Co-operative societies of the early christians, were churches, or mutual self-help curies. Let no one fear that cooperation does not possess elements of success. On the contrary ; it is as much more successful than joint stock companies, as the latter are more successful than the single individuals.

The co-operative societies have accumulated vast sums of money which they appropriate to many of the different industries, with perfect success. They have no longer any difficulty in owning and controling, in common, their immense flouring mills, steam engine works, printing establishments, and cotton and woollen mills. They make many of their own shoes, bake their own bread, own and operate their chop, and sausage works, tan their own leather, and are among the best inventors and discoverers of methods for economizing, and adapting labor to their own supply. The ratio of progression in these collectively managed, and mutually reciprocal enterprises, is incredible. They are able to build lines of steamers to America for purposes of mutual travel, and supply. A hundred more years of such growth will force the pen of political economists out of its wonted grooves of argument, from the old standpoint of competism, into a broad and bold defense of common interests.

If the social, or co-operative experiments of different people, are not sufficient to convince the reader of the justice and feasibility of collective ownership and control, in productive and distributive, as well as legislative industries, let him consult statistics, on a still more ponderous scale, and satisfy himself, regarding the ratio of progression in collective control by so prodigious, versatile, and mercurial an element, as the population of the United States.

In four fifths of their business operations, the governments—Municipal, State, and General— of this people, have succeeded. In this cast no mention is made of the form of legislation, the manner of conducting wars, or the method of choosing the representatives of the people ; simply the actual business operations under government, or rather, popular control.

The people have been quite successful in nearly every thing of this kind they have attempted, as a body politic. Within a century, they have shown their ability to manipulate, in the capacity of a compound integer, or a collective unit, almost every sort of business affair which hitherto had been conducted exclusively by individuals. Many of these enterprises, are brought about and operated, not only for the sake of the improvement they afford, in their various functions of production and otherwise, but notably for the sake of the permanent, and economical labor, which they offer to the people, who own them, and in whose collective interest they are operated.

The public schools are an example of this kind of enterprise. The people possess them, support them by their own wealth and industry, educate their children by means of them, develop the grandest resource of their national wealth by them, which is the public in. tellect; and at the same time, find employment for a great many of their own numbers, in the capacity of supervisors, teachers aud janitors.