CO-OPERATION v. SOCIALISM.

Waikato Times, Volume XXVIII, Issue 2292, 19 March 1887, Page 2 (Supplement)

CO-OPERATION v. SOCIALISM.

« This wan the subject of n debate which took place on Monday night, the 21th January, at the Toynbee hall, Commercial street, K,, between Mr Benjamin Jones, of the Go-operative Wholesale Society, and Mr IT. H. Champion, of the. Social 'Democratic federation. Mr Leonard Courtney, M.R, presided, and the attendance, which was a largo one, included the Bishop of Bedford and several ladies. Each of the disputants was at the outset allowed 15 minutes in which to state his case. Mr Champion, who was first called upon, denied that the indefinite extension of the principle of co-operation would put an end to all the evils that affected society. The object of the Socialists was to get rid of the idle and useless classes, sr.cli as the landlords and the capitalists, and any remedy which did not relieve them from these parasites would ignominionsly fail. Mr Jones, on the other hand, deprecated the use of physical force, so much advocated by the Social Democrats'. Capital had a right to remuneration, because it was stored-up labour, and co-operation would improve the condition of the working man, not by expropriating the capita,lists, but by enabling him to compete with that class. Subsequently, Mr Champion and Mr Jones addressed a, series of questions to each other, and later on were freely interrogated by the audience. Mr Courtney, in summing up the discussion, said he understood that Mr Champion did not wish to abolish private property, but only that which was being used and lent for the purpose of producing wealth. He confessed that if he were going in for a Socialistic scheme—which was not without its attractions —he should abolish private ownership altogether. He would make the nationalsation of property complete. There would be a little difficulty, no doubt — (laughter)—for opinions which had been entertained for some time would have to be sot rid of (hear, hear). He would, however, exhort Mr Champion not to be weak-minded,but to go the whole hog (laughter). But this was a difficulty which Mr Champion had not touched upon, and which he (Mr Courtney) never found any Socialist touch upon. Supposing, however, they had an organised society without individual property. How was the State to determine who, among the growing generation, were to be scavengers or legislators, and who managers or workmen ? How could the state undertake to carry out the distribution of the results of industry, which was the necessary consequence of having under its control the development, the creation, and the making of wealth ? True, they had organised the industry of the present Post-office; but he had never met a man who had the least idea how to apply such an organisation to the whole of the community. Then, did the Socialists intend to put a ring fence round the United Kingdom ? How did they propose to carry on the interchange of commodities with other countries ? This was a difficulty which ho thought neither Mr Champion nor anybody else would be able to solve. With regard to co-operation, while he greatly admired what it had done, and was persuaded it would go on increasing, still it could not replace and displace individual effort, which must always be found working busidc it. He did not share Mr Champion's impatience of Mr June's hopefulness. He believed that those who asserted that the condition of human life in this country was worse now than in the past had forgotten in their generous enthusiasm to examine the evidence (hear hear). Even now, when the ragged edge of society was so deplorable, it was better off than in former generations. They had made considerable advance, but, great as it had been, it would not be satisfactory unless they brought home to individual members of society their duty to themselves, to their children, to their families, to their fellow-labourers, and to the State. It was by that only that they would be able to elevate human life. If they could carry that home to the people of this country they would, without any machinery of Socialism and without turbulence and force, be able to recreate the society in which they were born. Votes of thanks to the debaters and to tha chairman concluded the proceedings.