A political creed; embracing some ascertained truths in sociology and politics. An answer to H George's "Progress and poverty."

Preface

Not wishing to make a Ijook^ I Lave compressed this into as comjDact a space as is compatible with a comprehensive treatment of the subject. I have called it an answer to " Progress and Poverty," by Henry George ; but it was written before I had seen his book, which I have read but lately. For if one be true, the other must

be false. As to that, let the reader decide.

G. M.

A POLITICAL CREED,

EMBRACING

Some Ascertaliiei Triitlis in Sociology anl Politics.

From before the days of Plato and Aristotle down to our own time, many of the most acute minds have been striving to discover, and to explain, the principles on which human society and political organizations are, and ought to be, based. Yet, to this day, in the different schools of politics and social science, the most opposite and incompatible views are maintained by numerous and able advocates. How far, then, is it possible to draw out, from the results of experience and reason, a connected system of principles in these sciences, so well founded and obvious as to command the general assent of right-thinking men ?

Setting aside all the authority we might derive from revealed, and, as far as possible, from natui-al religion, in proof that society and government are not merely of man' s device, I will enter on a search after the ascertained and admitted truths in sociology and politics, and endeavor to trace the connection of these truths with, and their dependence on, each other. 2

I

In this mysterious and puzzling world in which we find ourselves existing, what means have we of ascertaining the truths which should enlighten and guide us ? We find ourselves to be organized beings, endowed not only with certain appetites, instincts, and powers of action ; but, also, with the means of observing the phenomena surrounding and pressing upon us ; and, moreover, with a capacity and a propensity to draw inferences from these phenomena, when collected and compared with each other. Thence we arrive at conclusions, which we take to be laws regulating the occurrence and effects of these phenomena.

The want of leisure and of experience make this slow work. Yet we gradually acquire some knowledge of the nature of our surroundings. We make frequent mistakes, indeed, which we have to correct by further and more careful observation ; and we make some real progress in knowledge.

We discover that, besides the material world that surrounds us, there are intellectual truths which spring from our observation of it, embracing and explaining it ; which truths may be brought to bear upon, and, in a measure, direct and control matter.

We, moreover, discover that, while the mass of material objects with which we come in contact are organized beings, the law of that Kature which gave them existence does not endow them with permanence. Yet we see that it provides, by some means, for maintaining and replacing its productions as they pass away, filling up the gaps among its organized beings with a succession of beings similar to those that are passing away. This is one broad general law of Nature, applying to organized creatures, which we arrive at with a certainty that shuts out all doubt.

Further observation shows us that Nature attains this end by stamping on her organized creatures the relations of sex. All animals and all plants partake of these characteristics in one form or another. In the case of plants these relations are not so simple and obvious. But we soon learn that animals are divided into male and female, in various proportions.

Thus we soon become familiar with another comj^rehensive law of Nature : that organized life is maintained, not by the permanence of the individuals, but by their reproducing offspring like themselves, and that this reproduction is brought about through the agency of the division of each class of animals, and even of plants, into two sexes, male and female. Thus, we are beginning to master some of the great laws of Nature, by which she regulates the world we live in.

When we turn our attention to our own race we see an explanation of the instinct which usually leads to the mutual choice and companionship of one man and one woman : that is, to life-long, monogamous marriage, and to the many domestic and social proprieties springing from it. Many facts prove that this is the design of Nature.

1. In all countries and ages there is an approach to equality in the number of male and female births. Yet there is always, as far as we know, a small excess of male births over the female. Why is this provided ? As men, from their occupations and enterprises, are more exposed than women to be cut off by accidental and violent deaths, especially in boyhood and early manhood, this sliglit excess in the birth of males looks very like an express design in ISTature to provide for monogamous marriage by equalizing the number of the two sexes. The proportions of the two sexes in human births vary somewhat : from thirteen males to twelve females, to about twenty-five males to twenty-four females. The causes of these varying proportions, we believe, have not been ascdl'tained.

2. Unlike other animals, the offspring of mankind, need the care and support of both parents for a long term of years. Thus the naitural claim of both wife and children for maintenance, and on the property acquired, is obvious, and points to a life-long marriage, and suggests the obligation of monogamy.

3. The analogy of the instincts of not a few animals, in their unions, proves that monogamous marriage may be strictly according to Nature. Thus, wdiile in the hive of the honey-bee, there are thousands of workers, which are neuters, hundreds of drones, who are males, and only one female, the queen bee, we find, on the other hand, that the cajpreolus, or roe-buck, the pigeon, the goose, the ostrich, and many other animals, are strictly monogamous in their unions.

The more we investigate this point, the more obvious does it become that human society naturally originates in the monogamous marriage, and is based on the family springing from it. Where monogamous marriage is not the foundation of the family and of society, could we look back far enough, we would find oiit that some peculiar circumstances, some unnatural causes, have disturbed the order of Kature, driving the human race to polygamy or polyandry.

Howeyer the human race may have originated, we know that man does not now come into the world a solitary being. He has at least a known mother ; and should he lose lier at the time of his birth, his continued existence depends on some one who supplies her place.

Usually we come into life the expected and welcomed .member of a family circle. We are born into society. Our relations with kindred beings beginning with our birth, our self-seeking and our social propensities are developed together through the long years of infancy and early youth. Tlius the first society known to us is the family circle ; the first government, parental control. And we necessarily continue under these infiuences until we can provide for ourselves ; indeed, usually and naturally, until long after that earlier period of life. Moreover, we are ever after under some social influences — unless we become outlaws.

II

From the most primitive condition of man, to the most advanced stage of civilization yet reached, all the necessaries, conveniences, and comforts of life are the results of the labor and skill of individuals, working singly, or in combination ; but the primary object of each one is to reap, individually, the profit of his toil. For, although the world we live in affords to us fields of labor teeming with productions capable of being adapted to useful and beneficial purposes, they are not directly given to us. They are merely placed, more or less, within our reach ; not thrust into our hands or our mouths. It is left to us, when prompted by our wants, to help ourselves, by appropriating them. These acts of appropriation require, on our part, more or less of enterprise, labor, and perseverance ; and, moreover, are often attended with exhausting exertions, uncertain success, and even suffering and danger to those who make them. This outlay of labor, skill, and hazard, becoming inextricably incorporated with our acquisitions, originates our proprietary right ; that is, our right to exclude from the benefit of our acquisitions, those who have made no such expenditure of their energies on the materials thus brought into our possession or laid up for our use.

Thus, all value and utility, being the result of the labor of individuals, comes into existence in the possession of, and as the property of, individuals. Until there be property, there can be neither robbery nor theft. As soon as property comes into existence, robbery and theft become possible, and must be guarded against. In those cases, where the acquisition is the result of combined labor and united exertions, the undertaking is not complete until each one has assigned to him his share of the result. Thus proprietary right at once furnishes the motive for, and the reward of, our exertions to maintain and to better our condition.