The Ashburton Guardian. Magna est Veritas, et Prævalebit. THURSDAY JUNE 10, 1886. Socialism

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1260, 10 June 1886, Page 2

The Ashburton Guardian. Magna est Veritas, et Prævalebit. THURSDAY JUNE 10, 1886. Socialism

At the inaugural meeting of the Ashburton Debating Society the President, Mr J. A. Caygill, delivered an address upon Socialism, which bore evidence of exhaustive study and possessed considerable rhetorical merit. We can scaicely agree with all the views and theories expressed and promulgated by Mr Caygill, nor do we suppose that gentleman would wish to be accredited, in sober earnestness, with some of his barely-formed and half-expressed opinions upon the great social problem of the day, but the fact of a member of the legal profession entering upon an excuse for certain advanced and ultra-Radical forms of thought is a marked and note-worthy sign of the times. Socialism, so called, is not a thing of to-day, or of yesterday ; it was introduced to England, as the New Gospel for the political and material regeneration of the world, nearly forty years ago, but after a brief and fitful existence it practically disappeared, and in 1854 a prominent writer said, and with apparent truth, “ Socialism is dead ; to speak of it is to pronounce its funeral oration.” And so the matter rested for some years, but to day, an observer of current events must, to himself at least, admit that Socialism is every where. Under the grim aspect of Nihilism it has made a terrible struggle in Russia; in Germany and on the Continent generally it is almost omnipresent ; it has invaded Great Britain and America, and its extreme principles are preached and discussed in sections of the magazines and newspapers of almost every civilized country. It is difficult for a well-ordered mind to disconnect the term “ Socialism ” from scenes of riot, disorder and violence; it has been applied to so many horrible forms of excess that honest persons will be apt to start back in fear and disgust at the mere mention of the word. Rut as a matter of fact, applying the more precise and accurate meaning to the term, the English people are already a long way on the road to socialism. Proudhow, the author of the well-known sentence, “ Properly is theft,” when asked by a magistrate, if he were not a socialist, replied “ certainly, I am a socialist,/’ and when further asked “ what then is socialism ?” replied, “ Socialism is any aspiration after the amelioration of society.” If that were a full and explicit definition of the term, it would be hardly necessary to discuss the matter further. Rut the definition is too wide. It is rather a statement of the aim of socialism, while it leaves out the methods, peculiar to socialism, by which that aim is sought to be accomplished. If we should say, socialism is an aspiration after the amelioration of society, which it seeks to accomplish by the equalizing of social conditions, through the medium of the law or the Stale, we should have a definition much nearer the truth. In its origin socialism has much in common with all other schemes of reform, and much that must commend it strongly to all well wishers of the human race It , arises from the recognition cf the , existence of evils and iniquity in j society ; it sees the strong oppressing the weak; the rich crushing the poor, inequality becoming harder and more I unendurable ; the idlers of the world faring infinitely better than the toilers, and the good things of this life falling in an inverse ratio to the proportion of [ work done. The evil in society that the socialist feels most actutely is “ that the workmen’s, condition does not proportionately improve with the increase of production, and that their share in the extraordinary development of riches which has taken place during the century has been far too small.” Socialists further see that so far from die increase of wealth improving the position of the worker its tendency is by reason of competition and the strength which arises from accumulation to mao

the worker its slave and reduce his remuneration to what is barely necessary for a living. The socialist learns from political economists that all value and property are derived from labor, and thereto) e demands that wealth shall belong to those whose labor has created it, or at any rate that there shall be a fairer distribution than at present, fie says “ Let the greatest happiness of the greatest number be the aim of the State sought in its laws, let j ustice be sought and improved not only by theworking of individual selfishness, but by the sanction

and authority of the law ; let the State which exists for the safety and protec-

jn of all see to it tiiat all the condi-

tions of life are rendered just and i reasonable, and that the poor and weak : are not left to be a prey to the greed 1 and selfishness of the strong. In a word socialism may be defined to be stPtism as opposed to individualism, and we may conclude this necessarily brief notice of the problem by quoting a few instances in which the principle is already recognised. The State directs the employment of the common capital in the acquisition and working of railways, prisons, aslyums, hospitals, telegraphs, libraries, museums, &c., it regulates the contracts between labor and capital, it educates our children, it does scores of things which would have been regarded as socialistic fifty years ago, and the tendency towards greater legislative interference is acquiring strength every day. “Already socialism is recognised as a growing power in Great Britain ; it is impossible to read an important political speech, lon either side, without finding some j reference to a party which but two or three years ago it was confidently affirmed could never gain converts in England; the most active leaders of the Radicals have taken up a position whence they must either advance into the socialists camp, or condemn themselves to boneless opportunism for the rest ot their lives.”

Land Association Bill.

In the House of Representatives last evening Mr J. Ivess moved the second reading of the Lnn 1 Association Bill. As we have previously referred to this proI posed measure at considerable length, and its fate is already sealed, we will content ourselves with merely quoting some remarks upon last night’s proceedings telegraphed by the Wellington correspondent of the “Lyttelt n Times” . “Mrlvess did not seem inclined to explain the provisions of the measure, and told the House that it had been extensively circulated. The House laughed. Mr Ivess protested, and Major Atkinson noped the hon. member wpuld help the House to understand the measure somewhat. Thus pressed, Mr ivess went at the bill with a gasp ; and, with the help of side notes, and a not quite perfect memory, waded through some substantial portion of it. Then, getting tired, lie threw himself on the mercy of the House, and the House kindly let him off any further hard work. He said a few words after this, but soon contented himself by moving the second reading. Mr Taylor followed, saying a good many things in a disjointed way, not without point, but decidedly without sequence. Fie told the House that Mr Ivess had made confusion worse confounded. He invoked his conscience. He said it was all very well to laugh, and he made points in dumb show about several prominent members of the House, whom he indicated by a variety of creatures. The House laughed very much, and Mr Taylor, in the very climax of the fun, brought his speech suddenly to an end, and sat down smiling and beaming upon the House in quite a fraternal fashion. Sir Julius Vogel complimented the member for Wakanui on the careful manner in which he had explained the Bill, which sounded just a shade satirical on the part of the Colonial Treasurer, but he carefully refrained from saying ■-anything about the success of that careful method of explanation. He, for his part, damned the Bill with faint . praise. It was a very important Bill, and it dealt with a very important subject, ft had a good point or two, and rather more than a bad point or two. If it succeeded in giving cheap money to the right people, it would be a very good thing, but it might do that at too great a cost in the matter of the mixture of private empowering and public borrowing, and in the matter of increasing the private note issue and complicating a question which should be made more simple. The private indebtedness of the colony was really not so bad as to make the Bill imperatively necessary. Ihere were other methods which might bo considered. On the whole, it would be better to read the Bill a second time, but it would be quite impossible for hon. members to be able to understand the Bill sufficiently to do it justice in Committee, for which reason he thought that if any friend of the hon. member advised him to p'stpone the measure for a time, he would do well to take the advice. On this hint Mr Walker proposed an adjournment to June 24, and the House postponed the Bdl with a sense of relief. It certainly is an immensely hard nut to crack, and there is a feeling that such important questions ought not to bo dealt with by private members. It is just one of these questions which private members should be content with advancing to a certain stage only in the House, leaving it to the Government to take them up with the power and knowledge which are at the command of Governments alone. It is worthy of note that during his brief remarks, which bore evidence of careful preparation, the Treasurer told the House that any attempts of the Government to use the public credit for the purpose of creating a lending fund on cheap terms would, at the present time, bo most injurious to the public credit, it is that which, in 1 addition to the great difficulty of the ■ subject, paralyses all Ministerial efforts in this direction. ,