V
LINCOLN, NEB., THURSDAY, JULY 18, 1895.
NO. 6
VOL. VII.
l4 :
'
k
ft
SO MOVES THE WORLD.
"We deep and wak and Bleep, Dut all thing
move;
The Sun flies forward to bis brother 8nn :
The dark Earth followe, wheeled In her ellipse;
And human tutnus, returning on themselves.
Hove onward, leading up the golden year."
Peru and Bolivia are fightingmad with
each other.
Carpet weavers, over 1 0,000 in number,
are out on a strike in Philadelphia.
The operators and miners of Indiana
have failed to agree on scale of wages.
The employes of all the Philadelphia
carpet mills are threatening to join the
weavers' strike.
Kansas City councilmen have so exas
perated the people with gas works bood
feism that they have threatened to visit
them with ropes.
The organization of the plate glass
trust i&jibout completed. It is called the
Pittsburg Plate Glass Company. The
last plant to be absorbed by the trust
was at Elwood.lnd., valued at $350,000.
Detroit has just opened a 40 mile line
of electric street railway which is to
charee three cents a ride. Mayor Pin-
gree acting as mortorman took the first
train over the line July 8th, and was
greeted enthusiastically by the people.
A $20,000,000 capital coal combine
bas been formed by the Alabama coal
mine owners to raise prices. It is the
purpose of those in the pool to extend
it to include all the mines in Tennessee
and Kentucky, so as to control the out
put of the entire south.
The millionaire club of New Tork is
to build a gorgeously costly summer
club house on the Hudson. It will be in
the center of seventy-five acres of ground
purchased at Irvington which will be
fitted up something after the fashion ol
Tuxedo. The Rockefellers and Goulds
are in this club and prime movers.
Governor Altgeld is fighting the boodle
assemblymen of the Illinois legislature.
He has made startling statements con
cerning their corruption, saying that
$5,000 was paid one member for his vote
Investigation is looked for. The recent
disclosures of legislative corruption in
connection with certain measures during
the regular session are likely to lead to
the calling of an extra session of the
grand jury to inquire into the subject.
Result of The Conference
The following is a platform adopted by
the National Reform Conference at Pro
hibition Park, Staten Island, July 3, as
a proposed basis of union for the reform
forces. Representative Prohibitionists,
Populists, Socialists, and other reform
ers in large numbers attended the con
ference, which adopted the platform al
most unanimously. It was voted to call
another conference in some representa
tive city between October 1 and March 1
oext.
PROPOSED BA8i3 OP UNION.
As a basis of a union of reform forces.
"1. Resolved: That we demand Direct
Legislation, the Initiative and Referen
dum in national, state and local matters
the Imperative Maudateand Proportion
al Representation.
"2. That we demand that when anv
branch of legitimate business becomes a
monopoly in the hands of a few against
the interests of the many, that industry
should be taken possession of, on just
fns, Dy tne municipality, the state or
nation, and administered by the peo
3. That we demand the election of
udent and vice-president and D. S.
t senators by direct vote o the people,
and also of all civil officers as far as
practicable.
"4. That we demand equal suffrage
without distinction of sex.
"5. That as the land is the rightful
heritage of the people, we demand that
no tenure should hold without use and
occupancy.
"6. That we demand the prohibition
of the liquor traffic for beverage purpo
ses, and governmental control of the sale
for medicinal, scientific and mechanical
Uses.
"7. That all money paper, gold and
silver should be issued by the national
government only, and made legal tender
for all payments, public or private, on
future contracts, and in amount adequate
to the demands of business.
"8. That we demand the free and un
limited coinage of silver and gold at the
ratio of 16 to 1."
Limit Fortunes
Curb covetousness. Why shouldn't
this lust, the climax and total of Deca
logue sins, be legally restrained as are
others? Why is it ,the one privileged
crime with no legislative barrier nor ban?
Throughconcentrated compound-interest,
hereditary fortunes, transmitted
practica-ly intact, vastly more dangerous
and heartless than hereditary rank, are
being redoubled into tens of millions of
dollars each; some into hundreds of mill
ions of dollars already; and, inevitably,
into thousands of millions of dollars
j)kk. Boundless solecism in political
economy, Gospel morality, and common
eensel Yet every thinker must see that
there is no possible legal corrective other
than my Amendment.
As the world'B only hitherto remedy for
the financial cent rip (ul.has been violent
revolution destroy and start again it
is mathematical certainty that only a
sufficiently long period of undisturbed
law and order, peace and progress, is re
quired to produce even trillionaires.
This absorption process intensifies in the
cities. Thus, in Washington, D. ft, an
eleventh of the citizens uow own all the
lots, hence the notorious corruption
Congress besieged to subsidize real-estate,
Some closer limit is indeed enough than
one million dollars; but, a hundred mill
ions is better than no limit at all. Limit
omitting unanswerably proves secular
law a traitor to man; as it is bent to
rapidize and ensafe the tinanclal centri
petal: thus betraying him eventually
back to serfdom.
AhchcoveterSj thus compelled, will, to
avoid forfeiture into TJ. S. lreasury ap
portion surplus among friends, and stop
the infinite concentrating. The framers
of the Constitution would undoubtedly
have provided some like common-sense
restriction, had they foreseen the need
This Limiting Principle would have been
the Constitution's peculiar and original
glory, blessed the world with its moral
and economic example, applicable to
monarchies as to republics, and in the
highest, justest sense, conservative.
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
Preluding private.property-right car
ried to absurd infinitude. Now approved
by the veteran Lawyer, Judge and sena-
tor, Lyman Trumbull.
No citizen nor resident nor investor, in
any or all States, Territories or District,
comprising the United Stales, shall be
permitted to possess, in all kinds of pro
perty, an aggregate value of more than
one million of dollars; which sum shall
be the limit of private property in or for
any individual, joint-individual, guar
dian, trustee, or other form or device of
private estate o wnership, or reserved for
each inheritor or legatee. And whenever
or whatever such private ownership or
holding or reserving shall be found to
exceed the limit above named, the excess
shall be condemned as a public nuisance
and a public peril, and be accordingly
forfeited into the United States Treasury
And the states, etc,, shall, each and all,
enforce this amendment by necessary or
penal legislation, failing which, Congress
shall so j ttoree it.
Paymaster Rodney, tJ. s. n.
(Author of Alboin and Rosamond.)
Fort McIIenry, Baltimore.
The Land Question
Thesample copy of Equity sent me with
which I am so well pleased prompts me
to write what follows on one of the im
portant questions it proposes to discuss,
"The land question." If I may be allow
ed a friendly criticism of the arrangement
of the five questions, I would put the
land question first in order of importance
For they who own the land own the peo
ple. Land is basic to all things terres
trial. All things are built and done on
land. Without it nothing can be done.
All reform movements to be effectual of
good in promoting "equity," must be
founded on the earth, otherwise they will
be but castles in the air.
If all men were sober and industrious,
the landlord would raise his rents until a
bare living was left the laborer.
The most perfect monetary system that
could possibly be devised would raise the
value of land and the landlord would
reap the benefits and prevent "equity."
If transportation was reduced in cost
to one-fourth what it is, the rent of land
would proportionately rise to the tenant
No adjustment of the tariff can benefit
the landless man.
With all the reforms in government,
the discoveries in science and the inven
tions of , labor saving machinery, the
landless man has not been benefited in
the way of an "equitable" distribution
of wealth.
How to promote the production of more
wealth and distribute it "equitably" I
mean to the deserving producer of wealth
without infringing upon the rights of
any one shall be the burden of this in
quiry.' It will be conceded that what a person
produces justly belongs to him as against
the world. He has added his personality
to it, and it belongs to him. It is his
property. It is proper to him. It is
equally just that what ten men equally
produce belongs equally to the ten. And
what one, five or ten million people
equally produce belongs equally to all
that produce it.
There is but one thing in the world
that all the people jointly and equally
prod uce. That one thing is land values
(not land, for it is a creation, not a pro?
ductiou.) To prove the above proposi
tion, take the population of any prospe
rous town and multiply it by four and
you get the price of an acre of land in
heart of the town in dollars. The price
grades down as you recede from the cen
ter to the suburbs into farm land.
Take the population of any state and
multiply it by 500 and the product will
be the aggregate value of the land in the
state in dollars.
Land, however fertile for vegetation.
away from population is worth nothing.
The most productive land in the state of
Illinois ts on htate, Washington. Madi
son, Adams and other streets near the
center of Chicago. Land has sold there
at the rateof $10,700,000 per acre. The
million and a half people o( that city
with the surrounding country made the
Talue of land in Chicago.
In speaking of laud, I mean land ex
elusive of improvements. The improve
ments were made by individuals, and be
long to those who produce them.
If the people of Chicago hud surround
ing country produced the value of land
in Chicago and vicinity; they should m
justice and equity have the value they
produced. How to equalize this value to
all is our next inquiry.
The value of laud is what it will rent
for. A man may rent for ofle year or pay
all the future rental value of it atone
time and get a legal title for it in per
petuity. If the people produced the
annual rental value of land, exclusive of
improvements, why not take that annual
value by what we may call a tax, since
we have a tax gathering machine ready
made to order 1 will use the. term "sin
gletax" for want of -a better term to
express the collecting of this "economic
rent ' or "unearned increment of wealth
as J. S. Mill calls it. The landlord who
heretofore pocketed this unearned incre
ment did not produce it. Yet the land
lord class, an entirely non-productive
and useless class, a barnacle on the ship
of state, retarding its progress, pockets
fully one-third of the wealth of the civi
lized world, and yet we attribute the
hard times to every cause but the right
one, landlordism..
The rent of land advances in price be
yond everything else until it has absorb
ed so much of the wealth of the world
that capital and labor are unable to pro
duce, and turn to fighting each other in
stead of uniting against the great robber,
the landlord. j .
Do rents comedown in prices with other
things? Not much. Vide Pullman, where
the tenants only asked a reduction of
rents commensurate with wages.
The single tax on land values seems to
be a Divine arrangement for the expense
of government. The value of land and
the necessities of government increase
pari passu. Since the population of Ohio
has doubled the price of land and the
cost of government has quadrupled.
If what a man produces of wealth be
longs to him, what right has the state,
country or municipality to take part of
it away from him in proportion to his
industry, sobriety and economy, especi
ally when the whole state, county and
municipality has a value that all pro
duced? Why not take that annual value
and return it to all the community who
produced it in the way of public improve
ments, and such things as all may en
joyequal benefits from?
By taxing the products of labor, such
as improvements on land, and in fact
any kind of wealth, industries are dis
couraged. A tax on dogs makes them
scarce. A tax on wealth makes it scarce
and higher in price. A tax on land
values makes it cheaper and more plenti
ful. To tax a vacant lot the same as an
adjacent improved one would induce the
holder of it to improve it or abandon it
to some one who would. The single tax
would encourage industry. It would
lower rent. It would raise wages. It
would equalize opportunities. It would
thereby benefit all (except land specula
tors as such). It would compel invest
ments in improvements; for every indivi
dual controlling natural opportunities
would either have to utilize land by the
employment of labor or abandon it to
others. It would thus provide opportu
nities of work for ail wen, and secure to
each the full reward of his labor. It
would as a result abolish poverty, and
the greed, intemperance and vice that
spring from poverty and the fear of pov
erty. It would return all rise in the
value of land to the public treasury,
where it justly belongs, instead of as at
present into the hands of land specula
tors. By eliminating the landlord, labor and
capital would receive fully fifty per cent
more than they now do. There are but
three factors that enter into the produc
tion of wealth, viz: land, labor and
capital. Capital is denned to be laid-up
wealth to produce more wealth, ana is
the product of labor applied to land.
Land is the prime factor, labor next in
importance and capitaf a convenient
auxiliary. Each should have its portion
of wealth proportioned to its producti
vity or importance. It is well,enough to
remark that it is only on valuable land
that wealth is produced. It Is not land
we would tax, but land values. The pro
per agent to receive the share coming to
land should be the people's agent, not
landlord. The people produce the value
and should have it. Since the landlord
now eets full one-third the wealth of the
civilized world, if he was eliminated labor
and capital would get all the wealth pro
duced, for in a short time all would be
laborers and capitalists. The landlord
and other idlers would be compelled to
resort to industry for a living, for free
access to natural opportunities would
leave no excuse for - poverty. Poverty,
the progenitor of crime, would be abol
ished and no provisions would be made
for idlers. Under the single tax the lar-
mer would reap more benefit as a laborer
and capitalist than he would lose as a
landlord. He would pay less taxes than
he does now. To eliminate his direct tax
on his stock, improvements and machin
ery, and the indirect tax imposed as a
tariff, he will pay very little as a land
lord. He would not hold more than he
could put to a good use aud large farms
would be divided into smaller ones.
Farmers would not be so isolated as now
and would have better roads, school
houses, churches, etc. lenantry would
Continued on 6th page.
Christian i;o-oparatlon or LaOorUom
munlon
The following Is, In substance, an address d
llvored before "The School of the Kingdom" at
Its recent summer session at Iowa College, Grin-
noli, by ti e editor ol this paper.
''Your plan isevidently looked upon at
chimerical, aud I would know of its practr
cal side." (
So writes one who had obtained an in
perfect knowledge of an organization
lately formed by the writer and others at
Lincoln, Nebraska, an organization
named (to express truly what it is) "The
Christian Corporation."
Is there anything chimerical about a
corporation? Evidently not.
And can a Christian corporation or
body have no existence except in thought?
Is a Christian corporation -"vain, imag'
inary, delusive?" What do professedly
Christian business men answer to these
interrogations? Do we have any bus!
ness men who do business, either individ
ually or in companies, as Christ would
do it.
What is the life, the animating, direct
ing principle or the corporations we are
all acquainted with? Is it not selfishness
entirely separated from sympathy? Is it
not sublimated greed, the greed of many
gathered and solidified to constitute a
new body, a legal person, a grasping
monster that has no heart to feel or to
appeal to? The stockholders of corpora
tions are always clamoring for dividends
and measure success by the percent they
can command of the sweat of others
The senatorial committee appointed to
investigate has reported that the West
ern Union Telegraph Company divides
60 percent a yearon its investment. The
gain-seeking corporations are restrained
in their exactions only by the limit of
their power. They are absolutely love
less and merciless.
"Our roads werenot built forcharity,"
said Judge Hubbard, speaking for the
Northwestern Railroad last year; and so
much did its managers fear that a single
act of uubought service might be forced
from them by a thousand Industrials
who were seeking work and in sorest
need, that they called for the state
soldiery to save them from the one act
of forced helpfulness.
But corporations are not peculiar in
being selfish. They are simply the em
bodied spirit of the commercial world.
They do business on what is called "busi
ness principles;" so also do individuals.
Selfish or business principles are never
theless diametrically opposed to Chris
tion principle, to the law of sacrifice.
Strange as it may seem a corporation
cannot be christianized by leading into
the church all its stockholders. As the
churches now teach and practice, if the
stockholders of a railroad corporation
were all to become church members.it
would not reduce transportation tariffs,
or raise the pay of employes, or diminish
the burden of dividends, or provide more
work for the unemployed. It might in
crease church aud charitable revenues
somewhat, but it would give the world
no example of a Christian corporation,
a body of men doing business as Christ
would do it.
The church itself at the present day is
not a Christian body, because its so-called
members act as separate wholes, com
peting with one another, struggling for
gain one of another, doing business as
others do it, by the selfish method. They
do not become in any vital, organic,
whole, or holy sense members one of
another. They remain separated in the
midst of the selfish competitive strife of
the world and continue to accept as su
preme wisdom what has been called
"The simple rule, the good old plan.
That he shall get who has the power
And he shall keep who can."
The church is a Sunday society, a talk
ing, singing and praying society, a char
itable society to some extent. The
church has charge of the world's benevo
lence; the devil direct) the world's busi
nesson which the benevolence depends.
Which explains why there is so little
benevolence. With the exception of a
small minority of ministers like Prof.
Herron, the church does not criticise the
respectable selfishuess of the every day
business world. It cannot, so long as it
continues to practice the same thing. Its
preachers and teachers, with some excep
tions, are not alive to the fact that thfs
universal unrebuked selfishness, shown
in the competitive struirtrle and pursuit
of private property, is the rejection of
God's law and Christ's example, and that
out of its activities flow almost all the
evils and multiplied temptations which
afflict mankind. It kills love between
man and man and fills the world with
oppression, unsatisfied needs, unending
strife and misery.
The church has either lost faith in or
knowledge of the law of complete sacri
fice, which.contradictory as it may seem,
is the law of organization and the means
of divine individual life, salvation and
social order. There are sacrificers, who
consume all on the altar, but there are
no saved people in the church or the
world today. If I have been followed
closely I shall be understood. Loss is
not gain. Sacrifice is not salvation.
Sacrifice is loss, unless it wins the heart
of another. Sacrifice must unite men,
must call forth like loving sacrifice and
lead to economic industrial organization
that each may give and receive utmost
service, aud the organization! must in
crease in numbers until it shall come to
include all men, before there can be full
salvation and beatitude for any indivi
dual. We cannot be saved in this world
or any world by Christ's single sacrifice;
because salvation is the service and joy
of many sacrificial acts. The sacrificial
work that Christ in life and death began,
must be continued and perfected by his
disciples.. If we continue to seek our own
wealth or private property as individuals
or as competing families we are contin
uing in selfishness, aud faith in Christ
will not save us from the effects of it.
We talk about surrendering all to
Christ. But where is the evidence that
those who profess such surrender prac
tice it?. Except our giving up of all be
actual, and not a mere profession, unless
it shall differ from and greatly exceed the
giving up commonly practiced in the
churches, we can "in no case enter into
the kingdom of heaven." Industrial
sacrifice, the actual giving up of our pro
perty, time, talents, skill and daily labor,
the best and utmost that is in us, is the
law of lifo, is Christ's requirement. We
cannot give up our property prospect
ively, in the future, and labor for Christ
in imagination'. Christ's hungry ones
must be fed today, not after our children
and children's children have been pro
vided for. His homeless ones must be
now taken in and his naked clothed.
His blind must bo enlightened, his sick
healed and his imprisoned oues set at
liberty at this, present time. Heso began
to do, to save, and we must complete his
work. Christ made the needs of the poor
and the oppressed his own, and he waits
in judgment to see what we will do for
him in the persons of these, his brethren.
He will not have them treated as objects
of charity, or as Lazarus was treated.
He will not accept passing pity of us. It
is love, a brother's strong, constant, up
lifting love, that they need, and that
given to thera will be by him received.
Note the difference between love and
charity. Charity bestows old clothes
and some small portion of one's surplus;
love distributes equally, and will even
give up its own share to the unfortunate
and nn worthy. ' ,
We are plainly, positively, and without
exception or exemption forbidden to lay
up individual treasures upon earth. And
the reason of this prohibition is, that if
we do it our weaker brothers must suffer
need and perish daily. Yet, is it not true
that six days in seven we say as Cain
said, "Am I my brother's keeper?" and
that the brand of Cain is upon us all who
remain in and a part of the selfish com
petitive system?
The church is looking to the clouds for
Christ's appearing, And expects him by
some display of power to make "new
heavens and a new earth wherein dwelleth
righteousness." But his Spirit is now
here, waiting to be socially embodied
that this work may be done. He must
be revealed by us. Before Satan (or sel
fishuess) can be bound and cast out of
this world the Spirit of Christ must have
a body, not a member, but a body, not
a mystical body, not a lot of property
divided and therefore dead members, but
aliving,love-empowered industrial organ
ism. We who consider ourselves the
"house of Israel" and "the body of
Christ" are still in our graves. We are
as the dry bones of Ezekiel's vision (Eze.
37; 1-14). "We arecut off for our parts.
Canng more for individual members than
for the body, we have even lost our indi
vidual sinews and become very dry; and
we hear the question, 'Can these scat
tered siuewless, breathless bones be
brought together and live?' Have we
lost all hope that this may be?
Let us look again at the inspired des
cription of the embodied Christ, "the
larger Christ" that alone can save.
"Foras the body is oneand hath many
members, and all the members of that
one body, being many, are one body: so
ilso is Christ. For by one Spirit are we
all baptized into one body, whether we
be Jews or Gentiles, whether we bond or
tree; and have been all made to drink in
to one Spirit. For the body is not one
member, but many. If the foot shall say,
Because I am not the hand, I am not the
body; is it therefore not of the body?
And if the ear shall say, Because I am
not the eye, tI am not of the body; is it
therefore not of the body? If the whole
body were an eye, where were the hear
ing? If the whole were hearing, where
were the smelling? But now hath God
set the members every one of them in the
body as it hath pleased Him.
"And if they were all one member,
where were the body? But now are they
many members, yet but one body. And
the eye cannot say unto the hand, 1
have no need of thee: nor again the head
to the ... et, I have no need of you. Nay,
much more those members of the body
which seem to be more feeble are neces
sary: and those members of the body
which we think to be less honorable, upon
these we bestow more abundant honor;
and our uncomely parts have more
abundantcomeliness. For our comely
parts have no need: but God hath tem
pered the body together, having given
abundant honor to that part which
lacked: that there should be no schism in
the bbdy; but that the members should
have the same care one for another. And
whether one member suffer, all the
members suffer with it; or one member be
honored, all the members rejoice with it.
"Now ye are the body of Christ, and
members in particular."
This is not a picture of the church to
day. It is not such a body. But such a
body must be born and by its perfect
unity manifest the re-embodied Christ
Spirit. The hand of labor and the head
of capital must cease to strive. The
eye must not struggle in the market
place with the band, contending as to the
price of service, or the terms of exchange.
Christ's members may not sell their ser
vices and compare eye, ear, hand and
brain values, contending for gain and
service one of another. Such acts are
prostitution and profanation. It dis
members the Christ, drives his Spirit from
among us aud sacrifices his again broken
body upon the altar of Mammou.
The growth of selfish, corporations is
fast forcing upon us the alternative of
orgauizod co-ojration or slavery. But
the desolations aud distress of organized
war, between capital and labor, are
greater than the waste of single-handed
strife. Therefore we must have Chris
tian corporations.
The law of co-operation is not the spirit
of selfishness, but the spirit of universal
love and justice. Selfish co-operation is
u I ways destructive and in the end self
destructive. . Unselfish co-operation is
individually preservative und socially up
building, malting possible the most eco
nomic production of wealth and the
widest range of service. .
"Chimerical" to co-operate Rather,
let us say, it is chimerical not to co-op-erate.
Pursuing and struggling with
one another for gain, with which to pur
chase happiness, is, in fact, the chimera
which the world in all ages has gone
wild over.
"Two are better than one." A three
fold anion is better still. And as the
numbers unselfishly co-operating increase
the measure o! individual benefits will
increase.
The family has preserved among men
the idea of the world that should be, a
world where love rales. In many fami
lies the ideal unity of love, of sacrifice, is
realized so far as it can be realized by
the limited number of the home circle.
And individual sacrifice in the bomecircle
is sweet. But family is arrayed against
family in industrial competition and
commercial struggle, and this trans
mutes family love into selfish motive and
makes the home circle a circle of selfish
ness. We endeavor to fence off a little; .
fold for the family, but make, after all,
only wplf dens, places where the selfish
retire to enjoy the prey, and live lovingly
with wife and children.
God's plan, as revealed to Abraham, is
to destroy all selfishness first in the fam
ily, and enlarge the family in purely
unselfish relations till it becomes the na
tion, and make of the nation a univer
sal kingdom, God's kingdom, into which
shall be gathered all the nations of the
earth, We have the germ unit of "the
kingdom" which is to "fill the whole
earth" in the single family, father,
mother and children who live together
unselfishly, serving one another in love.
But this germ must be made to burst its
shell, its selfish circle, or it will never be
anything but a germ. The Divine Spirit
must quicken it aud compel it to break
its bonds and develop by communities
into a national and universal family; or
we can have no salvation from family
separating selfishness, no deliverance
from preseat evils, no growing kingdom
of God.
The individual has no right to be sel
fish, as an individual. The family has
no right to be selfish, as a family. The
nation bas no right to be selfish, as a na
tion. As members of the one family of
God we are all by our infinite Father
equally provided for, His equally loved
children, equal inheritors of His land,
mines, energies, air and sunshine, the
mrth and heaven. And we are made in
dividuals, each different from all others,
that each may endear himself to all
others by individual service. Some are
stronger than others; therefore their bur
dens should be heavier. Some are wiser
than others; but their wisdom should be
used for all. Service must not be bought
and sold.
Tse family into which children are born
is intended to be a training school of
love. The church into which the selfish
should be regenerated, is properly and .
must makeitself the growinircommunity
nation and kingdom of perfectly united,
industrially organized, unselfish families.
The church must forbid family self-seeking
as well as all individual selfishness.
It must make its (church) members actu
ally members one of another, a body
whose interests in production and ex
change cannot be separated or antagon
ized. As the human body cannot be
divided, so the Christian body cannot be
a body with divided contending interests.
Chimerical to love and serve one
another, to co-operate instead of com
pete, to be brothers instead of comba
tantsl Why, only the insane and atheists
n say so. Christians can never believe
it-
Christ made no mistakes. He was our
perfect example. He did not sell his ser
vices, either as a preacher, teacher, physi
cian or food provider. He accumulated
nothing, and left his mother in the care
of his most loved and lovable disciple.
His disciples with him, living under his
teaching, had one purse. Doing good
not getting gain, miuistering, not seek
ing ministration, was his example; and
it was an example for all men in all
avocations and for every day of the -week.
He disagreed very radically with
the political economists and respectably
selfish of his time and ours. But he
nevertheless made clear what is ol value
to all individuals, and how the wealth of
nations can alone be secured. He taught
the political economy which is divine, the
perfected science of production and dis
tribution.
(Continued on 4th page.)
