Economic Science
Author: Joel Densmore
Date: 0101-01-01T00:00:00+00:00

ECONOMIC SCIENCE;

OR,

The Law of Balance in the Sphere of Wealth.

BY

JOEL DENSMORE.

WITH

INTRODUCTION BY LOIS WAISBROOKER.

————

BOSTON:
COLBY & RICH, PUBLISHERS,
9 Montgomery Place.

1875.

Copyright, 1875,
BY JOEL DENSMORE.

Franklin Press:
stereotyped and printed by
Rand, Avery, & Co.

INTRODUCTION.

————

I have long felt that there was a remedy for the present unbalanced condition of society in the sphere of wealth; one which would release the masses from the pressure upon them that so often ends in crime,—crime that is more the result of circumstances, than of any criminal intention on the part of the individual.

I felt that this remedy would secure to the individual his selfhood, and, at the same time, give his individuality its proper social balance; such balance as would not, could not, result in injustice to any.

I sensed the fact that such a remedy existed; but I could not formulate it, could not discover the underlying principle, by means of which it could be demonstrated and made applicable.

I saw the efforts that were being made by the various labor-combinations,—the Grangers, Sovereigns of Industry, &c.,—but I could not work with them, for they seemed to me but the ineffectual struggles of guess-work; like striking out in the dark against an enemy that is too subtle for us. It was only combining competition into classes, and arraying them the more completely, the one against another; it did not touch the root of the evil.

I listened to the talk of "gold basis," on one side, and "legal tender, with expansion of currency," on the other; of "tariff" and "no tariff," and to the countless other propositions that came up; and they all seemed equally futile. All were in the sphere of effects: not one touched upon causes.

Suffrage for woman I believed was a legitimate right; and yet I had come to see that even a right may be exercised under such false conditions as to render it a curse. So I watched and waited, sensed what I could not see, felt that it existed, and yet did not try to find it, did not wander in search, when each step would have been a step in the dark. I worked faithfully in those fields of thought in which I could see light, and waited for the opening door to this.

I realized that nothing less than a national movement—something that would include the whole people—could be of any avail. At length I met the unpretending man who is the author of the following treatise upon Economic Science.

Uneducated in the learning of the schools, but with a soul attuned to nature's laws, he was able to study the working of society free from the prejudice of preconceived opinions. His conclusions, slowly arrived at, I am satisfied are correct. I am satisfied that he has found the true cause of our trouble, has found the law by means of which the products of labor are centralized in the hands of the few, to the injury of the many.

And I am also satisfied that he has found the true remedy. I am aware that each proposition needs elaboration; that there is enough subject matter in the following pages for volumes; for, like mathematical laws, they cover every possible case. But the elaboration will come in time.

I am well aware, also, that we shall meet with opposition in the propagation of said principles; for, people have so long recognized assumed rights as legitimate ones, it will take time to show them the difference. But, seeing therein the remedy for existing evils, we shall not fear to press them.

True, the change proposed is very great, but not so great as will be the ruin of this mighty Republic, unless something can be done to remove the power accruing to individuals and to corporations, through the immense wealth that they gain control of at the expense of the people.

It has been well said, that corporations are soulless. Corporate companies pay no attention to the needs of the people; nor will they, till they become representative of the people.

Six years ago I purchased a railroad ticket from Boston to Chicago for twenty-one dollars: now I cannot purchase one for less than twenty-five.

The country to-day is depressed far beyond what it was then; the general pay to railroad employees is less: why, then, this extra four dollars upon every passenger who travels that distance? It costs no more to send a letter through the mail; and why should it to ride in a rail-car? The profits arising from railroad enterprise go into the pockets of individuals; they control public necessity in this direction; and they, with other rich monopolies, control and corrupt government. And, as Mr. Densmore says, there is no remedy for this state of things, only through revolution, or through the method he indicates. To me, his conclusion is axiomatic.

If the working people will use the ballot wisely, they may bring the remedy through the legitimate channel; and, to avoid too great a shock in the change that must come, it were well to secure the surrender of individual control over collective fields of interest gradually; while the collective interests of the town or county need not be more directly under the control of the State than is the election of town and county officers now.

The principle is simple, and may be made easy of application, if the people will keep cool, while persistently determined to establish conditions of justice in the sphere of wealth; keeping in mind, the while, that the change is to be sought for the good of the whole people, rich as well as poor; for in it I see the only possible method by means of which we can prevent such a conflict between capital and labor in the near future as will bring the horrors of the French Revolution upon us; from which "May Heaven save us!" is the prayer of

L. W.

ECONOMIC SCIENCE.

————

PART I.

Why does Wealth centralize?—A Knowledge of Sociology needed—This Science in a Chaotic Condition—The Powers that govern Man's Will—Education upon other Subjects can not bring Balance to the Sphere of Wealth—Man's Aversion to Labor a Blessing—Man's Nature the True Basis of Society—The Sphere of the Individual and of the Collective Will, &c.

Not being able to reach the summit of Nature's observatory, from whence conclusions can be reached free from the prejudices of previous ideas, and every question of human interest truly answered, I can only present the views contained in this essay, as my opinion as to the true reply to the question so often asked:—

How is it in this new country, which has been discovered and settled under the light of modern science, art, and literature, that wealth is coming as effectually under the control of the irresponsible few, as it already is in Europe, where its present aggregation is an inherited evil, and not, as with us, an adopted one that has been fostered and nurtured into its present magnitude principally by the very parties who now possess it? Or, to put the question disconnected from king or country, What are the elements of centralization in the sphere of wealth? through what method has it fallen into the hands of the few?

In proceeding to reply to this question, it seems necessary that we should assign some reason for our differences of opinion upon the subject; for there is no general agreement as to any one answer that has yet been given. Our most learned men have not pretended to any very creditable degree of satisfaction to themselves or others.

Does this state of confusion arise because the question is unanswerable; because there are no fundamental principles pertaining to political economy, by means of which this branch of sociology can be reduced to a science?

This can not be, from the fact that wealth holds more real power, governs with more uniformity, than king or president; and also that it is possessed by those who are engaged in certain departments of public interest, while those engaged in other departments have ever been correspondingly poor. That men are rich or poor (as classes) as to the work in which they are engaged, is sufficient proof that such results are not the effects of blind chance, but of some first principle in political science underlying all habits and customs.

This being true, our ignorance of social science has produced such a diversity of interests, that our opinions and convictions are fashioned accordingly; and there appears to have been none who have so thought upon this subject as to find their way through these secondary causes, to first principles: consequently we have been under the light of said causes; and it has been just enough to enable us to see faults in another's views, but none in our own.

Whether the above conclusion is warranted, or not, I shall not at this time undertake to prove; but I write this essay under the conviction that it is. Consequently I shall make it my especial study to direct your attention, through the workings of society, to some of the first principles of its movements within the sphere of wealth. And in doing this, I shall speak first of the necessity of a knowledge of the science of sociology.

Of all the fields of thought demanding attention, there are none so undeveloped as is this most important of all sciences, so much so, that, with the exception of the definition of a few words, it is really in a chaotic condition: consequently we have no practical knowledge of the principles which, moving upon society through its varied pursuits, lead to given results.

This being true, and the exactly opposite being indispensable to any correct idea of economic science, it becomes imperative upon those who enter this field of investigation to do this work for themselves; and he who shall accomplish this, will have done a work that must eventually be crowned with success,—a conclusion that is not visionary, but fully warranted by the results that have followed corresponding work as done in connection with other sciences.

Astronomy, chemistry, physiology, &c., were once in the same chaotic condition as to their relations to society, and continued to produce as many different opinions as to their true uses, as are now prevalent respecting the causes that aggregate wealth, centralize it in the hands of the few. And this state of things continued till these sciences were reduced to order by the labor of those who saw the necessity of such a work. And now they are so far developed that there is a general agreement as to their uses; and they have thus become conserving forces to the good of society.

But, important as these sciences are, they are merely auxiliaries to private purposes, compared to the philanthropic work that will permeate and change the whole aspect of society when a corresponding work has been done in the field of sociology.

A knowledge of the order of the heavenly bodies, in their movements to certain results, is a source of agreement and consequent pleasure; as is also that of the chemical changes that are occurring about us and within ourselves, resulting in both mental and physical action; and so throughout the developed sciences.

But, great as these pleasures are, they are small compared with what will follow from a development of the science of sociology, that will enable men to shake hands as brothers across the chasm of our present social evils.

As we enter this field of science, the first object that presents itself for our consideration is man; and he is of such a compound, of so complex a nature, that one pursuing an inquiry involving the principles of his movements necessarily assumes a work of the same character.

He seems to possess two distinct departments of being, each with functions of its own, and yet each subject to the other; for, while the mind controls the movements of the body (so far as they are voluntary), the action of the mind is in turn controlled by the pains and pleasures of the body. And it is not only thus subjective to the condition of its own body, but its will is correspondingly controlled by all other bodies; and regardless of their nature, structure, or the skill and labor bestowed upon them, ever gives prominence to, and strives to perpetuate, not only those that are necessary to the comfort and preservation of the body, but also to the ornamental, or to whatever else is considered an exponent of the fact that due provision has been made for such comfort.

And through the same power, to wit, the sensations of the body, the will is correspondingly controlled to the suppression of whatever stands in the way of such provision being made.

The nature of this union between these two departments of man's being, the whole world questions, but does not comprehend.

At first sight, the mind seems to have as perfect and independent charge of the body, as though it were some foreign power that had come here for a few days, to lead about at will a piece of clay in the form of a man; not permitting itself to be questioned as to whence it came, the source of its knowledge, or its right so to do.

It engages the body in all kinds of pursuits, both human and inhuman; sets it to building costly temples in which to teach the way to eternal bliss; and at the same time uses it to adulterate articles of commerce, till the nations reel with drunkenness and disease. This is continued till the body becomes old, worn out in such service. Then it is left to be buried from sight; while this same mind, spirit, or whatever it may be, takes its flight to parts unknown.

So mysterious have been the workings of this power in man, that up to the present time, instead of seeking to understand the laws controlling it, we have looked upon it with awe, and submitted to our fate. And here let me say, that our present condition of things must continue to exist till the science of sociology becomes more thoroughly developed,—a conclusion which we find fully warranted, even in its present crude condition, when we study man through one of the departments of this science, to wit, that of wealth.

Here we find the mind in complete subjection to the demands of the body; for no amount of willing to the contrary can prevent the body from becoming cold or hungry. Hence man is controlled to the good of society, when the conditions upon which his bodily comfort depends are in harmony with the good of society. He will, he must, strive to perpetuate the conditions which secure to him bodily comforts.

In other words, through a true knowledge of the science of wealth, man will not only be controlled to the good of society, by having secured to him the conditions through which he can provide for his bodily wants; but the agreeable influences thus brought to bear upon his mind must predispose his will, through the legitimate law of its control, to the conservation of such conditions. That which is necessary to the comfort of the body not only holds the will in conformity with the enjoyment thereof, but predisposes it to use the body to do the work, and endure the fatigue, necessary to the continuance of said comfort. And this it never fails to do, unless the pain to be endured in order to the performance of the work is a stronger motive to inaction, than the expected good is to action. So truly are our wants the governing power of the will, that we may in one sense call them the god of the will.

The wealth now possessed is an exponent of the resistance and encouragement that has been brought to bear between the different classes, and also between their unit members, while in its pursuit.

These motive powers that exist in the necessities of our being, when properly understood and applied in the interests of society, will secure to all what is justly theirs. And this is particularly true of food, clothing, and shelter.

The pain of hunger, and the consequent palatableness of food, are the motive powers that control the will to determine to obtain food; so that any sane man or woman in good health can be trusted to obtain food for themselves, if the conditions necessary to such provision are secured to them. And this is true of all our physical wants.

Why, then, are so many so illy provided for? Is it because the motives to cause them to strive to obtain what they need have not been brought to bear? This can not be true, for they suffer from the lack of those things more than others; and, as proof that the will is not wanting, they do more work, and suffer more fatigue, in proportion to what they obtain, than does any other class in society.

Powerful as these motives are, they fail to direct the will to labor under certain degrees of oppression; but they fire that same will to resistance, even till the lives of the oppressors are taken in self-defense. The nobler the man, and the better informed, the less oppression he will endure before he will turn upon his oppressor, forcing him to lose his hold or his life; a condition of things that must ere long exist here in our United States, unless something can be done to check the flow of wealth from the many to the few; for the intelligence of our American people is such, that they will not much longer submit to the oppression that arises from this cause.

Then let us reason in council together, O men of America! and see if we can not find some method through which the threatened conflict can be averted, while the plowshare continues its work, and the pruning-hook to prepare for the gathering of fruit.

The laws which will secure the peace and harmony of society are inherent in our nature, and will be directed, both individually and collectively, to that end, just so soon as the individual is secured the proceeds of his own labor, when he shall be able to live without being forced to butter another's bread, while eating his own dry.

The lack of this balance in the sphere of wealth, the failure to secure this condition to the individual, is the germ from which has sprung countless wars, national, civil, and individual. For the will is so under the control of wealth, is governed so much more by it than by any other power, because of the pleasures and pains consequent upon its possession or the lack of it, that men will protect each other where their interests in connection therewith are in harmony; and contend, even unto death, where such interests are opposed, one's to another's.

We are pointed to education as a remedy for the evils under which we are suffering; and, so earnest are the people in their efforts in this direction, that enforced, or compulsory, education is becoming the law of the land. But this will not, can not, remove the difficulty.

We do not need to secure a balance between the mental and physical natures of men; for this has been the work of the civilized world for a century or more.

Republics have been established; schools have been multiplied beyond that of any former period; knowledge has been scattered broadcast over the land, and under the influence of as pure motives as can inspire human action, even till the powers of nature, that were once looked upon with awe, have been utilized to our service. And this has been done, not only in our own country, but in other lands as well.

Both the government and the people at large have countenanced and supported the inventive genius of the age, and the diffusion of the knowledge that has made it effective, with an idea to the best good of the whole; and have tried to hold the results of such knowledge, the wealth thus accruing, to the service of all. But they have failed.

And why? Because Nature is true to herself, and provides no means of removing an evil, only as we act upon and remove the cause. The unequal distribution of wealth keeps steadily on the increase; and the future darkens proportionably to nine-tenths of the people, pointing to poverty and want, not only to the ignorant and vicious, but to the prudent, the moral, the educated man and woman.

The inevitable conclusion is, that the work necessary to be done does not lie in the direction of education. The individual members of society can never remove the difficulties under which we labor from the lack of adjustment in the sphere of wealth, through the development of their capacities in the sphere of education, only so far as it shall teach them the laws pertaining to the sphere of wealth.

Our work lies in the direction of capital, and its power to secure its own ends at the expense of the public good. Capital is the king of this age, who claims the divine right to rule. This is the power that we must meet, and subjugate to the good of all; and this can be done only as a proper balance is secured between public and private interest. No man or class of men should be allowed to hold, as a private right, the control of that which can interfere with the public good; must not hold, as a privilege, that for which an equivalent can not be secured to every member of society.

That all will improve their advantages alike, can not be expected; but, till this condition or relation of things is secured, it can be said of no man that he is really accountable for his poverty, and no man can have an honorable title to wealth. In fact, there is nothing else that can place society upon a sound basis, one in which industry and economy are the sure and only conditions to wealth.

To secure this balance of power between the different classes, with their divisions and subdivisions, is the work of the collective will. This collective will has the right, through its agents, and should take the charge of all work, the nature of which, if entered into as a private right, would in any way enable its possessor to draw to himself the conditions of another's independence.

When the conditions of balance are thus secured by the collective will, then the individual has the right to improve, and apply to private purposes.

Thus the individuality which man shows himself determined to retain would be legitimately secured; and at the same time there would be nothing to stand between industry and its just rewards, or willful neglect and consequent poverty.

These legitimate rewards and punishments should not be interfered with, for they are Nature's methods of teaching. Thus you see that I do not believe in a community of goods. Man works to meet the demands of his being, from the knowledge that he must do so, or suffer; and a community of goods has a tendency to remove this direct responsibility to one's self, which is Nature's power to industry.

The aversion that man has to labor seems at first sight an evil; but upon further examination we find it an essential element to progress. If he toiled simply for the pleasure of toiling, there would be no incentive to utilizing the forces of nature. He would not even have a donkey to carry a grist to mill, or a mill to grind it, but would find some method by which he could save that pleasure to himself; to wit, that of working upon the grain to make it fine.

If labor was a pleasure to a man, simply for its own sake, and not for what it will bring him, he would not, as now, strive to produce the most possible with the least labor; but, on the contrary, would strive to make the most labor produce the least, thus rendering him unfit to be called a progressive being. Nature does her work correctly, as those will see who study her motive powers. She has so constituted man, that it is what he obtains through labor that he enjoys; and at the same time there is such a disinclination to labor, that he utilizes every force possible.

So keenly does he enjoy the results of labor, and so thoroughly disinclined is he to toil, that he will force others to labor, and take to himself the products, if he can. And here is where the true work of the reformer lies at this time. The balance must be struck between labor and capital. The collective will must take charge of the collective interests of the people, giving the individual the control of that which is particularly his only so far as said control can be used without danger to the liberties of another.

That men have aggregated to themselves the rewards that were honestly due to others, and that they are doing so in our country to-day to a greater extent than ever before; and that those who hold special or chartered privileges, or have in any other way obtained possession of that which affects the public good, are using their utmost power to secure to themselves a still greater harvest in the future,—is a fact patent to all.

It is not to find fault with, to disapprove of the disposition in man which leads him to seek pleasure and shun pain, that I call your attention to what has resulted therefrom. Not at all; for it is the conserving power of all progress. It is because these motive powers of nature, as brought into relations with wealth, are out of balance, that so many are forced to work for themselves and others too. It is because, as members of society that has common as well as individual interests, individuals and classes have been permitted to hold privileges which have enabled them to subject the former to the latter.

In dealing with the innate principles of our nature, it is important that we have a proper understanding of their relations; for they are the base upon which a true structure of society must rest. To trace those principles in their future action upon society through the successive changes which they will force it to take ere it rests squarely upon this solid base provided by nature, is more than I am able to do. But, that I have stated what the next step must be, I think is proven; or, if not, the fault is in my inability to set forth the evidence properly, and not because it does not exist.

Admitting that one could thus trace the steps necessary to reach an ideal, or perfect state of society, it would probably destroy his influence in his own time; for those that were any great distance in the future would appear so erroneous to those of the present age that to state them would be useless.

Past changes have not been wrought in this manner; not by fixing the mind upon some ideal in the future, toward which society deliberately tends, but as a means to removing some great evil that could not be longer endured.

But let future changes come as they may, whatever structure society takes upon itself, the individuality of each must be so secured that all can feel sure of the full benefits of their own labor, and be certain that they must also reap the consequences of their own neglect. Then the same motives that now prompt a man to compel another to serve him will compel him to serve himself.

The full statement of my idea, in as few words as possible, is this: I would so balance the forces that call men into action, as to have them see and feel that they can not enjoy the results of another's labor, either directly or indirectly, without giving an equivalent in return. It may be asked if this will not interfere with our liberty. Yes, it will interfere with the liberty that enables the few to make the many serve them; will hold in due subjection the freedom that one man enjoys at the expense of another.

This kind of freedom has had to be surrendered in the past in exact proportion to the increase of the freedom of many. This surrender of the privileges of the few to the rights, the interests, of the many, has been steadily on the advance; the evils that arose from different phases of oppression never failing, in their turn, to remove the causes which produced them, and each in their true and legitimate order.

In the earlier history of the race, the evils that demanded removal through change arose from small, distinct, but hostile clans that made it their business to prey upon each other. This condition of things could not be removed, or at least it was not, till those clans surrendered their liberty as hostile clans by coming under the control of a centralized government; which was really a concession in behalf of the people's rights, though not seeming so at first sight, for it gave them advantages that they could enjoy as clans.

But the king, or the combined aristocracy, became tyrannical in proportion to the security of their position, and so oppressed the people that another change was sought and consummated, one which secured to the people the right of self-government, or the choice of their own rulers.

In looking at those changes after they have been effected, and after the comparative happiness consequent thereon has been enjoyed, they appear to us to have been so necessary and so simple that we lose sight of the fact, that, while they were pending, men of science and ability, men of culture and experience, alike with the most profound philosophers, were at loss to know what were the powers out of balance, and so could not indicate the changes requisite to their adjustment.

A knowledge of the questions affecting those changes of the past may be partially ours, by taking into consideration the time it took to effect them, the conditions under which they were secured, and, after all, the limited manner in which they are now enjoyed.

I have referred to the changes that have given us our present phase of civilization, for three very important reasons:—

First, To show that the power of the few over society has in each case been surrendered to the liberty and happiness of the many.

Second, Because we must have some knowledge of the conditions connected with, and the effects resulting from, past changes; or we are without the necessary landmarks by which to determine whether we are advocating a measure of reform or anarchy.

Third, Because society in its progress never contradicts itself, or changes the order of its growth: consequently the same work, in point of principle, requisite to effect the changes of the past, must be done to secure similar or needed changes in the present or future. Life in all its varied forms, both animate and inanimate, gives its affirmation to this last statement; from the fact that development is secured by an extension of the first principles of the existence of each individual form, and not by the introduction of any new law of growth.

This being true, as all nature declares, there is only one method through which we can hope to be successful in bringing about the reform desired; and that is, to extend the principles that our fathers found necessary to apply to the ruling power, to take up the work just where they left it off. For the evils that press so heavily upon us have not resulted from what they did, but from what they left undone, and which must be done before said evils can be removed.

Here is a method of inquiry that will lead one who pursues it to the cause of our present social evils; for, if an evil that presents itself is the effect of some work that has been done, it proves that work itself to be the effect of an evil, and not of an intelligent action on the part of the people for the removal of an evil by removing its cause; and to deal with the said work, in order to remove further resulting evils, is only dealing with effects to remove their causes.

But, when we trace said evils up through their working till they point to something that has not been done, then we have discovered their true foundation; and when we remove them, as far as it is in our power to do so, by doing the work indicated, the conservative nature of society is such that they are removed forever, unless said society is thrown back by some foreign invasion.

In looking at the evils of to-day from this standpoint, our attention is not directed to man's nature as their source, but to some work, either in the field of individual or of collective enterprise, that he has not yet done. All departments of human interest connected with the sphere of wealth are included under the above heads; the labor of society being thus separated into two grand divisions:—

One, that to be entered into by the individual, to be superintended and controlled as he sees best, as we see him doing in his private affairs now; the other, the field of collective enterprise, into which the individual may enter only by the consent, and as the representative, of the collective will.

I should like to speak further of these two fields of labor, but will only say at this time that the work of the first tends to centralization, from the extreme action of which we are suffering so much to-day; while the work of the collective field is that of decentralization, and tends to hold wealth and its sources of production justly related to all concerned, minorities as well as majorities.

These two kinds of work are so different in their nature, that it is impossible for society to be at peace with itself, no matter what its knowledge, or humanity of purpose, so long as a proper division of their respective spheres of labor has not been made.

To mistake the collective field of labor for that of the individual, would be a misdirection of our powers and capabilities that would produce a state of society such as we now have. This being true, to refuse to assign our present evils to the misdirected energies of the unit members of society, is to suspend judgment, and refrain from action under the clear light of day, and under the most urgent demands that can command attention.

Society ever has and ever must suffer the evils perpetrated by itself through the misdirected energies of its members; and these energies will continue to be misdirected till the collective field of rule is fully possessed by its legitimate authority.

Society has its center, as well as other organized bodies; and that center is its collective interests.

Those who are successful in controlling said interests to their individual benefit prove that they are in their right places; only they should serve the collective interest, instead of controlling it to themselves.

They should be the representatives of said collective interest, managing it for the public good; they receiving no benefit therefrom further than their salaries, only as they are a part of that public. They should act in such capacity, or they should let the collective interest alone. This field of labor is now held by individuals or by corporate bodies; and they force the public to accept their terms, or refuse to serve it; and, holding the avenues to said work in their own hands, they of course become the real rulers of the people.

This unbalanced power has so perverted the judgment of those who hold it, that they believe in their right to hold it to their own aggrandizement as much as ever king believed in his divine right to rule. And, what is more deplorable still, the whole community is taught to look upon them in the same light; thus embalming, as it were, in the very heart of society, the cause of its oppression.

These two interests, the individual and the collective, correspond, in their action upon society, to the two forces that rule the planetary system. The sun is one: the planets are many. The power of the sun is the centralizing force which would draw every thing to itself; but the collective tendency of the planets is against this centralizing tendency; and the proper balance between the two keeps the system in harmony. Should the centralizing force get the control, the planets would be drawn to the center to their own ruin, if not that of the sun. On the other hand, should the planets get the balance of power, they would run lawless through the sky, and we should have planet-anarchy.

But society to-day is in the condition that the planetary system would be if the sun, or governing power, were not large enough to balance them, and Jupiter, Saturn, or other of the larger planets, should get between it and the lesser planets, and attempt to run the system for their own particular benefit, taking to themselves the warmth of the sun, and leaving the lesser ones to suffer from the want thereof, even as our millionaires do the small planets of society. The collective interests that pertain to society must be put in their proper center before the true balance can come. The centralization that we have to contend with to-day is not only undue, but in the wrong place.

Still, in looking at the causes that have produced the present conditions, you will readily see that there is no special blame to be laid at the door of any one man, or class of men, further than that which is common to us all. These conditions are the results of the abuse of the undue power that unlimited wealth gives one man over another, or the individual over society. This being true, there is only one method of relief; and that is to superintend the avenues to unlimited wealth by the collective will.

Men are not so heterogeneous or so dissimilar in their natures as to render them uncontrollable by any government or rule securing good society. They are every thing to the contrary; for the interest of one man, when properly understood, is so in conformity with the true interests of all men, that it may be said, with more truth than fiction, that the whole human family is but one man moving around in different bodies, with hardly enough difference in temperament to make him a first-class man in any one of the several occupations if left to himself. Each needs the others for completeness: consequently we have nothing to fear in pressing the changes that we can show are for the best good of all.

This need that one has of others in the different occupations, is, in my opinion, proof also that one should not, can not from the standpoint of principle, of justice, claim greater remuneration for corresponding labor performed in one department than in another; and any thing other than this seems to me an encroachment of the individual over society, or of society over the individual.

PART II.

The Power of Public Sentiment—The Concealed Cause of our Trouble—In which Division of Society concealed—The Law by which Wealth flows from the Many to the Few—The Purification of Government—The Conditions under which a Political Party desiring Reform can be organized to become a Success, &c.

Believing that by this time you have an understanding of what I consider the power out of balance, and also of the work of its true adjustment, but not a convincing view thereof, I feel it a duty that I owe to you and to myself, to ask you to throw aside the prejudice of preconceived opinions, that we may look, if possible, from some common standpoint upon the workings of society through the principles that move it.

Unless we can do this, our efforts will be fruitless; and all that has been said up to the present time has been for the express purpose that you might be able to comply with this request, that you might be able to weigh the summing-up of my evidence with unbiased minds.

Hoping that my efforts have not been in vain, I shall now direct your attention to the working of society as indicated above.

When I think of the power of public sentiment, I feel that society must be laboring under the effects of some false idea that has been incorporated into the relations underlying its movements; something that has not yet been discovered as false, and, consequently, has been indorsed as a fundamental principle of good society, and thus has escaped public censure.

That every nation in the civilized world is suffering under oppression, of which they would gladly rid themselves if they knew how, is proof to my mind that society is holding in its conserving embrace the very cause of its adversity; for I believe it impossible for an evil to exist long when the cause thereof is so well understood as to fall under general condemnation.

There may seem to be exceptions to this; but it will be found, upon closer inspection, that in such cases the censure has fallen upon effects, instead of causes.

Public sentiment is a controlling power. That it should be, and is designed to be, is too well known to need confirmation. Long-standing institutions, governments, customs, and habits, though once powerful, have crumbled to pieces before its revolutionizing tendency. Hence, for any form of oppression to be on the increase when the cause of such oppression has, for any considerable length of time, been under public censure, is simply impossible.

The cause, therefore, of the evils under which we now suffer can not, as yet, have been discovered as an evil, but must be looked upon as a necessary condition to good society and public security.

We may begin to see, then, why it is that industry and economy do not necessarily keep their possessors from poverty, nor the lack of those virtues prevent wealth from flowing into the coffers of those who stand so related to this hidden cause that it turns in their favor; for, public censure ruling from a false standard, society must of necessity be falsely affected.

Having thus, by the aid of one of the strongest of social elements, proved the cause of our oppression to be a disguised power, some evil that is dressed in the garb of good, the next step in order is to ascertain in which department of public interest this disguised power is so concealed as to escape public detection, and, consequently, public censure.

Upon analyzing society, we find it to consist mainly of two grand divisions, to wit, the producing and the trading classes, to the latter of which the professional and the official classes are comparatively subjective. These two grand divisions comprise nearly the whole human family; the first producing the wealth, and the latter distributing it, controlling its exchange. But which possesses the most of it?

It is a well-known fact that the trading division does, and through such possession controls those who produce it, as well as the professions and the officials. On the contrary, those who are engaged in productive labor are comparatively poor; and, as a class, have but very little control over society, are in what may be called a besieged condition.

This, to me, is conclusive evidence that the hidden evil, the perverted power, that has produced, and still continues, yea, increases, the oppression that is so apparent,—it is to me, evidence that this power is in the trader's hands, or, at least, inclines in his favor. Our well-stocked markets and our crowded warehouses prove that the poverty of the productive classes does not result from a lack of effort on their part. They have produced enough to supply the needs of society.

And yet, owing to the power that the trader has of getting their productions from them without a just compensation, producers are dependent upon the very ones that they feed and clothe; so dependent that they themselves often suffer from the lack of what they furnish others. Now, if the power by means of which the trader does this was not a disguised one, an injustice wearing the form of justice, would the productive classes submit to it?

They possess as much sterling worth of character, and as much persistency of purpose, as does any other class of people; and, if they saw the cause of that which oppressed them, they would resist the imposition, would work persistently to its suppression. In fact, I do not believe that the traders themselves realize that their relations one to another, and to the productive classes, necessitate injustice to the latter. But the fact that they possess the greatest proportion of the wealth, proves that they have got it somehow, and that too without giving a just equivalent in return: otherwise the productive classes would be equally as wealthy, in proportion to their numbers; for it is certainly as much labor to produce, as it is to trade upon that which has been produced.

The productive classes are, likewise, just as selfish as are the trading classes. They have as strong a desire to possess wealth, and strive as hard to obtain it, if not harder; and, if the disguised power was in their favor, would be equally as ready to use it to their own aggrandizement. And, further, if this disguised cause of evil existed in any thing that is common to both classes, then it would affect both classes alike; for they have their origin in the same ancestry, and, with equal opportunities, must be correspondingly equal as to condition; for like causes produce like consequences.

Therefore inequitable money, false systems of currency, tyranny of the majority over the minority, the question of suffrage for woman, &c., having a common bearing upon both of these great divisions of society, any of them that would benefit or injure one class would do the same to both. This goes to show that that which secures the success of the trader over the producer is a special power in the hands of the trader, one that can not be held in common by the producer under their present relations.

In tracing the effects of this disguised power, we are constantly pointed to the trader. Still we find them a class of men who seem to be honestly engaged in the work of transfer and exchange,—a work that is just as necessary as is that of production; for without it our productive industries could not well exist.

Having, as it were, arrived at the top round of human enterprise, and not yet having pointed out the cause of the centralization of wealth in the hands of the few, to the oppression of the masses; not yet having answered the question with which we started,—you may be inclined to point the finger of scorn, and to call me an impostor in the field of political economy; and justly, too, did not the movements of society point to the disguised power in the shape of the trader as a private speculator in the collective field of enterprise, diverting the life-currents of the nation from their legitimate channels of decentralization, into those of centralization, till it has become so debilitated that it shakes like an aspen in the hands of a few Wall-street brokers.

Never were a people more victimized under the plea of public utility, when it was believed that the few possessed the superior wisdom to rule despotically the destinies of empires, than are the masses to-day, when acting under the delusion that the inner currents of society, on which flow the world's commerce, are superintended with greater justice to the public by private enterprise, than they could be by collective rule.

The patricians of Rome never feasted more sumptuously on the delusions of their day, than private speculators upon public interest are doing in our midst now.

The injustice is the same in point of principle as was that inflicted by despotic power; and there is no help for our depending classes only in the surrender of the power that holds them in dependence; and, if we fail in this, we have a fearful precedent of the future of this great nation in the ruin, the desolation, of the Roman empire.

That the speculators of Wall Street have held this nation trembling in the balance, is publicly recorded in the history of the gold conspiracy of 1869; and but for the gold under the president's control, thus enabling him to hold them in durable subjection, they would have succeeded in their attempts against the public good, for their individual benefit. Charles Francis Adams, jun., says of these immense combinations of wealth, in the thirty-eighth volume of the Westminster Review, "An empire within a republic, with wealth greater than that controlled by most kings;" and he further says, "The corporation is in its nature a threat against the popular institutions which are spreading so rapidly over the world. Wherever there is a popular and limited government, this difficulty will be found in its path; and, unless some satisfactory solution of the problem can be reached, popular institutions may yet find their existence endangered."

We believe that the only possible solution lies in the division of the fields of individual and of collective enterprise, giving to the latter the control of all avenues to unlimited wealth; and, in support thereof, would ask, why it is, when the president and his cabinet, and the Wall-street brokers, are so nearly alike in their selfish natures, that the gold which in the hands of one conserves the public good is in the hands of the other such a power to the dissolution of business, that the National Government has to interfere to prevent utter ruin.

The answer is simple. The money, in the one case, is under the control of the decentralizing power of the collective will; and, in the other, is under the control of the centralizing power of private enterprise.

Here, then, we have an example of the humane effect of the collective rule in the domain of wealth, and of the opposite tendency of private speculation. Yet the Wall-street trader is no more oppressive, in accordance with the nature and power of his business, than are other classes of traders. They are all engaged in a common effort to draw to themselves, as far as is possible, the wealth of society, and the consequent power to command further possessions.

The Wall-street broker does not deal with the money market with any greater spirit of injustice, nor make the welfare of those depending upon it any more uncertain, than the traders in the production of raw material have done, and are doing in the labor market to-day. They take every possible advantage of the laborer: they use their millions to get possession of all the paying enterprises, on the one hand; and, on the other, introduce the most improved machinery, and then demand a reduction of wages.

The laborer having but little money (owing to small wages), and no general knowledge (on account of the nature of his work, and the monopoly of his mind in the interest of his employer), feels himself completely besieged, and surrenders at will, only to be forced to still further submission.

What is true of these two classes of traders is true of every other class; they subjugating each other also, just as far as it is in their power to do so.

But, to follow the workings of the respective classes in detail, would only be spending time to prove what must, ere this, be apparent to all: therefore we will only look further at the two great divisions, the productive and the distributing traders. Here we shall find, in its true action, the centralizing power that gathers the wealth of the nations into the hands of the few. And what is it? What is this power that thus gathers to itself the products of the labor of others? It is the control that the individual holds over that which becomes, through the necessities of the public, a source of wealth.

This is the fixed and only principle upon which the centralization of property is based; and men gather it in exact proportion to the extent of their control over public necessities; or, in other words, in accordance with the amount of that which is a public necessity, which passes under their control as private property.

The productive traders, or those who deal in the raw material of our products, in doing their work decrease in numbers, and increase in wealth, as they succeed each other in the movements that are necessary for the raw material to become developed wealth. But when, by being made ready for use, these products have changed their relation to the public need, and are being demanded back again, then this law of centralization is proved inversely. For, the nearer we come to the people, the greater the number of traders, and the less the individual wealth. Controlling a less quantity of the public necessities, they have, as a natural result, less power to draw wealth to themselves through those necessities.

Moreover, it is the power that public wealth has in the hands of the private speculator, that gives rise to interest on money, and consequently makes money another power of centralization, besieging the speculator as he does the depending public.

The centralizing power here complained of is not the disposition that man has to draw to himself; for, if he lacked this power, he would be a trouble to himself and others. It is because he occupies a position in which this centralizing power tends to undue action; because he is permitted to hold, as private property, that which the public or any considerable number of the public must have to live upon, and also gets control of the conditions through which that living must be secured.

It is as men possess this privilege over society, that they have the power to draw to themselves the wealth of a people, a nation. Men are made to serve each other through the necessities of their being; and having and holding private control over the conditions which meet those necessities, is the true cause of the wealth of the many passing into the hands of the few.

It is this centralizing power that now has control of every department of public interest. It owns and manages all our manufacturing interests, our railroads, telegraph-lines, controls our shipping interests, conducts our commerce, and, through the wealth thus accumulated, builds our large cities, where tens of thousands eke out a bare subsistence, or are driven, through the pressure upon them, into desperation and crime; and thousands grow rich, and erect palaces, at the expense of the producing classes; and is the true and only cause of the unendurable burdens laid upon us by non-producers, and by the false expenditure of wealth.

All this, and much more, is the legitimate outgrowth of private speculation in the collective field of enterprise. It is the power accruing from wealth thus gathered, that is bidding defiance to all kinds of governments, republican not excepted; and this is the power that we are called upon to subdue, in behalf of the consequent sufferers that are on the increase, both in point of numbers and privation, throughout the civilized world.

Gravity is no truer to its own law, and no more necessary to the existence of solid bodies upon this earth, than is wealth to the existence and welfare of man. It is the divine power, so to speak, which governs him; and it has demonstrated its power to rule wherever and by whomsoever possessed.

It is this power of wealth, that makes it imperatively necessary for potentates to have control of it in some form, in order to hold any command over their subjects. The power that wealth has to feed and clothe us is a sufficient reason why every man, woman, and child should have command of enough of it to meet their needs. In fact, wealth is to society what a rudder is to a ship; and whoever controls it controls society.

I do not call your attention to the power of wealth because I consider it an evil: on the contrary, it is good, and becomes evil only when out of balance, when held by the few, to the injury of the many. I only wish to show you, in connection with what I have previously said, that this power is a true and legitimate one, and only becomes oppressive when it is held as private property, to make gain at the public expense.

It was once thought to be the divine right of the king to control the wealth of the people at will; and it is now thought to be the divine right of the few to get and hold wealth under the plea of public utility, and to govern the masses under the garb of democracy; though they do so at the expense and consequent delusion of universal suffrage.

True, we have the right to vote; but, to those who are not so fortunate as to be among the wealthy few, it makes but little difference whether we have the ballot, or not, unless we can learn to use it to the abrogation of that centralized condition of wealth which now holds us in subjection. The advantages of the common people in this country, over and above those enjoyed by a similar class in other countries, has not been due so much to a democratical form of government, as it has to the fact that this was a new country, and, the conditions to wealth not having been monopolized, every provident person had a chance to provide for themselves,—a conclusion that is verified from the fact, that our monopolies increase in proportion to the increase of our population.

True, wealth is not controlled by a despotic form of government in our country; but it is held and controlled by the few, and those few are private individuals, or corporate companies, with rights of which an equivalent can not be possessed by the masses. These few, with the wealth in their hands, control the government; and we, being subject to the government, are as completely under the rule of an aristocracy, as are any people in Europe.

A condition of things that must continue to exist as long as the avenues of public wealth are under the control of private enterprise, instead of being in the hands of the true decentralizing power,—the collective or democratic will. The individual will is aristocratic in its nature, and the collective is the true democratic. We claim to be a democracy; and yet, when funds were needed to defray the expenses of a war that threatened the life of the nation, we had to borrow of the aristocrat, of the individual, and are to-day burdened with taxes to pay the interest thereon. A democracy playing rule, with the feet of the aristocracy upon its neck! Had we managed our own public interests, this need not have been. The government—to wit, the people—would have had money to lend, instead of having to borrow.

But it has been otherwise; and, as a consequence, we are showing signs of national congestion. For the circulating and distributing power of society, or its inner currents, upon which flow the world's commerce, hold the same relation to its unit members as do the lungs and heart of our bodies to the molecules or atoms of which they are composed; and any derangement of the former is attended with as serious consequences as would be a derangement of the latter; and the symptoms of vital derangement may be detected in society, as readily as in the human body.

The atoms that make up the most perfect development of our bodies are the elements of premature decay when they lose their balance in the vital organs of life so those men, who are by nature a conserving force to good society, become a power to anarchy and rebellion when they get out of balance, and lose their true relations one to another.

I would say, then, and think that I have conclusively shown, that the cause of the present unjust distribution of wealth is not from the want of more general culture, and a reduction of the hours of labor; it is not that our system of finance is wrong; it is not because our natures are selfish and corrupt: but because men, through ignorance of their true relations to each other, have lost their place in the specific realm of wealth, and are trying to centralize and hold to themselves the life-currents of society.

I do not intend to say that our system of finance is a correct one, or that we do not need more culture and less toil; but I do say, that whatever is wrong here is not a cause, but an effect.

And I further say, that, though there may be temporary palliatives, there can be no remedy for the evils under which we are suffering but in the surrender of private control over public necessities. And, to secure such surrender, we must show to the people at large that their happiness and security, yea, that the very life of the nation, demands the supervision and control of collective rule in every department of public industry; and that only in this manner can government be purged of its corruptions.

But it devolves upon me here to show why it is that our government has become so corrupt, and to explain, as well as to assert, the method of its purification.

Government does not become corrupt without an adequate cause; and, so far as I can see, the cause lies in the lack of the direct action of public sentiment upon it. Public sentiment holds the purifying power; or, if not, there is none that can be made available in this direction.

But this power has not been brought to bear upon the government: those who are interested in the controlling avenues of wealth stand between it and the people, protecting it from public censure, while corrupting it to their own ends. You may look into whatever department of business you please: if public sentiment is not the ruling power, there is little or no regard for public rights. Power must balance power, to secure justice; and men's natures are not changed by being elected to Congress, or by being appointed to public offices. They are the same modifiable beings all the while; and, whatever acts they may be guilty of in any department of public trust, such acts, I am fully convinced, are the results of the modifying power brought to bear upon them while discharging their respective duties.

Consequently men who under the right influences justify public trust are, through the action of the same laws of their being, made corrupt under false conditions. Hence the only way to purify government is to extend its work, and thus secure the power of public sentiment in that work. This can be done only by government taking upon itself the work in which the public is directly interested. Said work is the superintendence and control of both natural and produced wealth, in order that it may be held in its true relation to the interests of the whole people; subject to the principle of democracy, and the authority of those interested.

In this manner we secure two results; to wit, the purification of government, and the equitable distribution of wealth: consequently two evils are removed through one and the same work.

We have so far talked of what must be done; but we have said nothing of the how to do it. The change that we desire, and which must come, can only be effected through a new political party, or through revolution. The latter we would avoid if possible: if it must come, let our working people be found upon the platform of constitutional right, leaving the aggression, as in the case of the recent Rebellion, to come from the other side.

But what are the powers that organize successful political parties? In looking at the causes that have led to such results in the past, we find that we must work with Nature as she unfolds society through her laws of progress. And it is of little use to move till she is fully ready, has fully prepared the way for such movement; and she does this through the law of growth.

This growth does not come in a day, a week, or even in a generation; yea, if a century fits us for so important a step as must next be taken, we shall have advanced rapidly, compared to what has been in the past. The last positive step in advance was taken nearly a hundred years since, by our Revolutionary fathers, in their declaration of independence from the mother-country, which culminated in securing to the people the right to govern themselves. Time was necessary to test the practicability of that movement. The people must have their rejoicing over what they had gained, and must learn, through experience, what is wanting, if any thing, to complete its triumph.

The law that controls the growth of society, being true to itself and to the interest of future generations, does not stop to rest, so to speak, but continues its work till it brings to the surface some other hitherto undetected condition by means of which one portion of society oppresses another, and develops the evils that arise from such oppression till they become so great that another step must be taken. To-day the people are groaning under the oppression coming from the power of centralized wealth. They have tried various expedients to rid themselves of this oppression; but it only holds them the tighter. And something must be done; but what is it?

Society will not take any great step in reform, or make a successful effort to rid itself of any species of oppression, till it has not only a knowledge of what constitutes the oppression, but a clear view of some specific work, which, if accomplished, will remove such oppression. It will stand and contend, no matter how heavily burdened, till the right step in the onward march of progress is indicated, marked out, and a reasonable hope of success made apparent.

Our fathers, when they secured the right to govern to the will of the governed, took the last vital step in reform that has yet been taken. They did this because of finding from long experience that, when one man or class of men govern without being under due restraint from the will of the governed, that man or class of men, by the very nature of their being, are too local in their feelings and interests to enable them to govern with any creditable degree of justice: hence there was no power upon which the government could rest, in point of justice, except upon the corporate will of the governed.

This principle is the one supposed to be secured to the United States citizen; but, notwithstanding all this, the wealthy few still rule.

This is proof to me that a mistake has been made which prevents the application of the principle designed. That mistake, as I see things, consists in the fact, that, while the right to govern is secured to the will of the governed, the means necessary to execute that right are still held by the individual.

If it can be shown that either the individual or the collective will has any power to self-preservation without the requisite means to that end, then all men, and governments as well, can be wealthy by simply willing to be so. This we know is not possible; hence the corporate or collective will can not govern till it has control of the means that will secure the power to govern.

Our government does not possess this means: it is forced to draw its revenues from the people by taxing the necessities of the poor, from those it lends its aid to oppress, and pays the results of their hard toil to millionaires as interest on money that should have been its own, and will be when democracy is in possession of its legitimate field of rule.

Then industry and economy will be the only conditions to wealth; positions of trust, the strongest incentives to justice; and talent and ability receive their highest rewards when seeking the public good.

This conclusion is no phantom of the brain. Our Constitution, in point of principle, is an engine already geared and belted, and attached to a forty-million power, and only waits the turning-on of the steam to make us in love with the simplicity of justice.

“But how is it," the critic will ask, "that men were induced to adopt a constitution so far in advance not only of the then existing state of society, but even of the present, if, as you have stated, society cannot be induced to take a step in advance only to get rid of an evil experienced; if we are really advancing according to society's legitimate law of growth; if the evils under which we are now suffering are not the result of a retrograde movement?"

The question is a legitimate one; and it will be remembered by those who have read carefully what has already been advanced, that we have stated that there are different classes of evils of a national character, and that they come up in the order of their magnitude, and are removed through experience. As society advanced, this order continued its work till the evil that came uppermost was a denial of the right of freedom of speech upon religious and upon State matters. I mean that this evil that had long been submitted to as a necessity arising from the divine right of the ruler, and the law of its preservation, increased in magnitude till there was no safety for any: then the people sought to remove it.

It was during this struggle for religious and civil liberty that the continent of America was discovered; and it was settled largely by those who were desirous of this liberty, and who improved the first opportunity of securing it by establishing our present Constitution.

Thus you see that our Constitution was not adopted to remove the evils under which we now suffer; though, in my opinion, it provides for them almost as well as though it had been.

It was written to protect the liberty of speech and of the press upon matters civil and religious, without which life and property seemed of but little value. The liberty of speech and of the press is alike to be enjoyed by the individual and the State; and it would be disastrous to attempt to draw a line between them. The individual may speak and write upon any thing that concerns the interest of the State; and those who represent the interest of the State have the liberty to adopt or reject the views of the individual as they in their deliberations may decide is best, but may not deprive the individual or the minority of the right of educating the majority to think with them if they can bring convincing arguments to that effect. And thus a healthy competition in the realm of mind is secured.

Allow me to say here, that, while admitting full individual liberty in the mental sphere, it seems to me that the liberty that permits a man to inflict suffering on another by the extension of the principle of competition into the field of physical necessities, such as food, clothing, and shelter, is quite another thing.

The ultimate consequences of competition in the two fields of action are as different as are light and darkness, or right and wrong.

The concussions of mind upon mind through speech and pen are the true conditions that develop the capabilities of mind, and are indispensable to good government; while the expenditure of our physical natures in the competitive struggle for the necessities of life tends to both physical and mental inability; it has produced our present inequitable distribution of wealth, and is, in fact, an extension of the principles of war.

Therefore, while we can not draw a line between individual and collective right in the sphere of mental liberty, when we come to the field of our physical necessities, it becomes absolutely necessary to draw a line between individual and collective rule. Therefore, though our Constitution was not formulated and adopted to guard against the evils under which we now suffer, it contains the elements by means of which they can be removed as well as though made for that express purpose; from the fact that liberty of speech, both civil and religious, is encroached upon through the undue power of wealth not directly, but just as effectually; for thousands are so situated that they dare not speak their honest sentiments lest it take the bread from them and theirs.

Real mental freedom can not exist so long as our physical welfare is subject to the control of others, through the power of wealth.

Yes: our Constitution secures us the power, through the action of a successful political party, to bring in the reform desired. Our fathers secured to us the right of liberty in the sphere of mind, but, for want of experience, failed to confine the liberty of the individual within its true province in the sphere of wealth. Consequently the right to mental liberty is in danger; and this danger must be removed, can be through the channel provided.

But the power to organize a successful political party does not lie within the province of any one man, or class of men. It is incorporated into the very constitution of society, and ripens into action in perfect accordance with the magnitude of the change to be effected.

We may decide, however, when the time to commence the preparatory work has arrived. We may quicken the action to such ripening by pointing to the evils to be removed, and indicating the method of removal. Slavery was removed in this manner; and I fully believe that the time has come to take the initiatory steps to the next great change that must come, or our national ruin instead.

If, when the principles involved in this essay are laid fairly before the people, their attention is not arrested, it will prove one of two things: the principles are not sound, or the nation has not ripened to their acceptance.

But being convinced that they are sound, and that the times are propitious for their presentation, I am satisfied that when even a few band themselves together, with said principles as their basis of action, they will fasten public attention upon them; and that the work thus commenced will so organize itself as to secure success eventually, if not immediately, and that in much less time than it took for the removal of chattel-slavery.

And with this, my honest conviction, I leave these thoughts for your further consideration.