Labour's Wrongs and Labour's Remedy

LABOUR'S REMEDY. 23gling for, inrespect to the attainment of wl~atare calledtheirpolitical rights, they will only grasp a sllndom-they millbut obtain the lelter, not enjoy the spirit, of that greatlaw of equality of rights whicl~ has been institllted by theCreator. Tl~ey have before them, as an example of fi~ilure,one of the most enlightened and powerful reprlblics ofancient or moiiern times-a nation ~vhosc form of governmentis all that politicians wish for, antl far more tl~an theoppressed people of Britain hope to obtain-and yet thisgreat nation, in coltl-blootled cruelty, and disregard ofhuman rights, sinlcs bclo~v Englantl herself, king-ridtielland priest-ridden :IS she 11:ts bccn for centuries!As, then, sufficient proof is nffortled 115, by times pastantl times present, that no form of government can insureto a people the cnjopmcnt of equal rigl~ts-that no formof government, ~vllether repllblican or monarchical, canprote~t the l)roductive classes from the exactions anti thetyranny of tl~c useless classes, nor gr~ar:ultee to the formerthe enjoyment of tl~e fruits of their industry-what planmust be adopted to overthrow and destroy the secretenemy which devours us ?It requires no arguments to prove that man wasintendeii, by his Creator, to live in a state of society, orcommunion with Elis Itintl ; and if society, in its presentstate, inflicts upon any of its menibers as m;111y wrongs asit confers benefits, it cannot from hence be inferrcd thatthe principle of coln~nunion is necessarily attended I)y 1these wrongs and sufferings : it is far more rational, antlmore in accordance with the perfect adaptation of otl~crmeans to other ends, to conclude that ve do not act properlyupon this principle of communion ; for man is muclimore liltely to err in following, than Nature in directing.gquality of rights is the very soul of society; butequality of rights cannot exist unallied with equality ofduties. This is the sum and substance of equality. Thus,if three men be placed upon a desart island, and they eachgive an equal portion of labour for the common good,and receive an equal reward, the con~munion is equal!ybeneficial to all the three. But if one of the party, byforce or fraud, obtain double sllowance of procioce for only~vorl;, the union cannot longer be eqtlal{y beneficialto all tlte three. If, again, the same man compel I~is fellowsto give him double allowance of produce for no lnbozrrIvhntever, every shnrlow of equality and justice vanislles atonce ; and no Inw nor regulation can restore equilibriumof right, unless tt cornpel tliis receiver ofunearne(l sllarc to give liis ];hour for SUC~share ; for thevery essence of the inequality and the \vrong consists intile illeqnality of the duties rendered and tlle rewardsreceived by t11e scveral partics. There is no esponent ofequal rigllts but that which also stands for equal duties ;and if duties be unequal, or equal duties be unequallyrewarrled, tlic very of justice is at once irlv,zded,and of rights destroyed.In all ci~ilised countries, as they arc called, society isthus dividecl into id1e1.s nnd protl~~rcrs-into those \vl~o&hin tlouble nllo\r~al~ce for tloing notl~itig, ;inti tllose whoonly half-allo\vnnce for cloing double \rorli; and SOlong as tliis difYerencc of position ilnc\ inerlli;~lity of conditionis suffcr~d to exist, ineqrinlit~ of rights and lawsand enjoyments will :tlso exist. It lnnttcrs not howsociety cnmc to be in its present state. It is sufficientthat it is found thus, ant1 t11at it may be altered andamended. Wl~y should: some nien receive double allowancefor doing only single nrork. or quadruple allolvancefor rendering no service ~rhatever ? All the excessivetoil, and poverty, and misery of the worlting classes of allcountries arise solely from this most unjnst and iniquitousmanner of apportioning the 1;tborir and the reward ; andnever, until \ve alter the social arrangements which produceand perpetuate this injustice, can !re obtain relief.What arguments are needed to prove to common sense,that, if ten inen hxve to maintain twenty, the ten mustmorlc hnrdcr or longer than if tlrcy liad only themselves tolreep? What lcinti of eqrlalily qf rights can there possiblybe bet\vecn the keepers ant1 the kept? There isneither equality of service rendered nor received ; for tlleone party gives all, and tl~e other party takes all-andherein lies the essence and spirit of all inequality.It does not follow, merely because society is nowdivided into productive and unprocli~ctive classes, that thedivision is either natural or inevitable, as the politicaleconomists have asserted. A very cursory examinatiori ofthe causes whicl~ render men rich and poor, and maintainthe illequality of condition after it llas been created, willshew us that this inecl~ality, $9 far from being depcnder~t