1
10
2
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/5b332b900c68250f5b388e2b66effab3.pdf?Expires=1779926400&Signature=R90LoNyVw8xZWKWONQBcMHqNEyHPhmiiJHxXB0FQuy2qX0QAZ2dE3kID1voDEnb8cq5idzQJg0FMvxQ0l9MOm9SsmxvNKGEmEKRxOiyC9u6cWQKfWpo1vR-QtFu515yfmrCKa20mnsD3PrT-%7EnCpev5pAykjeuDayf2sHOsiASgf15-XwWzoTI868TMTXFLkFh5a202dB9d02y9kV2NzKPZFf1-7traGWeLGRQTtdsXmujc38VEF0IIi7QttqiYSSayTvFPqNrdElzJ0DR4t%7E9L3SuB2pKgkuNlFxEnTetHLmkaeL4nHFyRg8Xm4EL6lOJYI5921FzifLUccPThclA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
386dbfcf224440c7ef5743292571eb24
PDF Text
Text
qsJ 0
LIBERTY, EQUALITY,
FRATERNITY.
BY
ANNIE
be s a n t.
THIRD EDITION.
'• ’A
t-
*
LONDON:
FREETHOUGHT PUBLISHING COMPANY,
28, Stonecutter Street, F C.
PRICE ONE PENNY
�LONDON;
PRINTED BT ANNIE BESANT AND CHARLES BRADLAUGH,
28, STONECUTTER STREET, E.C.
�LIBERTY, EQUALITY, FRATERNITY.
Freedom, Justice, Brotherhood : such, in other words,
is the legend which is inscribed on the Republican banner,
which is the motto on the Republican shield. With these
words gleaming on her brow, Republican France fought and
conquered; with this war-cry ringing from her lips, Repub
lican France unsheathed the sword which struck at the
tyrants+of the people, and at “the priests of an evil faith.”
Alas ! that France, maddened by oppression, and by most
cruel outrage, blinded with furious hate and passionate
indignation, conscious that she was strong enough to defy
her gaolers, allowed herself to be betrayed by the emissaries
of monarchs, and permitted some of her citizens to be bribed
by English coin, until the golden letters were tarnished with
blood, and their brightness shone lurid through a mist of
terror. And yet France—glorious in spite of her madness
and of the despair of her anguished fear—France clung fast
to the grandest thought ever struck out of the human soul:
men are free; men are equal; men are brothers. The
shame of the Revolution we fling back on her tyrants ; on
the kings who had made France their playground, and had
rioted while the people were starving; on the nobles who,
evil courtiers, fluttered round an evil monarch, and wrung
from the peasants’ food the money for their feasting, and
took from the poor man’s home its brightest ornaments, the
honour of his wife, and the purity of his daughter ; on the
Church, whose priests were corrupt, and whose Bishops were
the worst of a bad court, foul with the double foulness of a
hypocrisy which knelt to God in order the better to rob
Man. On these be the disgrace of the Reign of Terror,
of the massacres of September. These men had taught the
people that Liberty meant the power to grasp at everything
which gratified the whim of the moment; that Equality
meant that, when possible, those above should be dragged
down to a lower level; that Fraternity meant that brother
should slay the brother and betray the sister. Little wonder
�4
LIBERTY, EQUALITY, FRATERNITY.
that the evil seed bore evil fruit, and that Republican France
did not shake off at once the ingrained habits of France
Monarchical. Yet at the worst she did not torture her
victims, as the Monarchy had tortured Damiens; or commit
them to long-drawn agony, as the Monarchy did with its
Irttres de cachet; the massacres of September were scarce so
bloody as the massacre of St. Bartholomew, or the guillotine
so devouring as the dragonnades of Louis. True, the
B epublic shed the blood of nobles, while the Monarchy
shed only the blood of the people ; there is the secret of the execrations that arise against the Revolution, and of the
hatred which blackens it and defames. In spite of her
faults and her errors, the Republic held fast to the thought
embodied in her motto ; she was based on principles that
were pure and strong; her creed was noble, even though
muttered by lips that were red with blood. And to-iday we
repeat it, we Republicans, enthusiasts, dreamers, as men
call us, we proclaim that the words are true, that the thought
is perfect; we own as the ideal we worship, “ Liberty,
Equality, Fraternity.”
It is well, however, that we should attach to each word of
our motto a clear and distinct meaning, so that we may
never be led away into making an indefensible statement,
or be betrayed into a foolish and untenable position. What
is Liberty ? Not, as some seem to fancy, the power to
impose upon others a political constitution of which they do
not approve, or a form of Government which they do not
desire. Not the fact that our own opinion is uppermost, and
our own ideas triumphant. Not the discovery that we have
grown strong enough to bend the wills of others to our will,
and to make the world as we would wish to see it. Liberty
means that every individual is left perfectly free to follow
his own will, to pursue his own objects in his own fashion,
with no limit whatsoever imposed upon him by others ; this
complete freedom being bounded only by the equally com
plete freedom of every one of his neighbours. Nothing less
than this is liberty; nothing more than this is possible. This
liberty is the birthright of every man and of every woman.
The right to life comes with the fact o. birth; and life
implies something more than mere existence ; it implies the
right to exercise every physical and every mental faculty, to
grow, to develop, to become perfect. No one has a right
to maim another’s body; all admit this ; and yet men claim
a right to maim the faculties of another, to break his mental
�LIBERTY, EQUALITY, FRATERNITY.
5
-arms, and to stunt his mental growth. No man can exercise
his faculties to the fullest extent unless he has complete
freedom to do so ; but no man has a greater right to com
plete freedom than his fellow; and, therefore, we are
■driven to the conclusion that every individual has a right to
complete freedom of action, but that he has no right to infringe
on the complete freedom of any one else. Liberty, then,
implies the right to live the fullest and happiest life of which
the individual is capable by the constitution with which he
is born into the world ; it implies the right to property, to
■all which the individual has acquired for himself by his own
skill and his own power, provided that, in acquiring it, he
has not trespassed on his neighbours either by force or by
fraud; it implies the right to make what contracts or arrange
ments he pleases with other individuals, provided, again, that
the contract contains nothing which trenches on the rights
of other parties. The free man is king of himself, but he is
ruler of none other; self-respecting, he must respect the
rights of others; jealous of his own liberty, he must be
equally jealous of the liberty of every one else; stern
defender of his own dignity, he must equally sternly repress
any personal inclination, or any inclination of the many, to
injure the same dignity which is in each individual alike.
There is no picture of a nation possible to imagine which
is sublimer than this: a nation of men and women, each
free to develop into that beautiful variety which is one of the
marvels and the glories of Nature, each a law to himself,
•each the defender of the liberty of each, strong and digni
fied as only free citizens can be, with the strength which
grows from self-confidence and from confidence in others,
with the dignity which is born of the knowledge that he who
lives on the highest level he can reach, deserves the respect
of his own heart, and wins the respect of all who surround
him.
Equality is a word which is used as carelessly and as lightly
as Liberty, and with as little thought of its only possible
meaning. Equal in natural endowments, equal in possibili
ties of achievement, equal in physical and in mental strength,
equal in moral virility, men are not; in this sense they are
not born equal, in this sense they never can be equal; this
■equality is nowhere found in Nature, for throughout her
mighty realms there is an endless variety, a marvellous
interweaving of higher and lower elements, but never a
dead level of equality, wherein none is afore or after other,
�6
LIBERTY, EQUALITY, FRATERNITY.
none is greater or less than another. As a simple matter
of fact, does any one pretend that men can be born equal
in power and in possibilities? Take the children of
drunken and unhealthy parents, born with enfeebled nerves,
with stunted limbs, with dwarfed brain and diseased blood ;
take the child of hardy, sound, and temperate parents, with
strong round limbs, and well-strung muscles, and all the
bright vitality of young new life thrilling and bounding
within him ; are the two babes born equal ? Could they
be equal under any possible system of government? Let
them be born, if you will, where waves the flag of a true
Republic, and let no factitious superiority raise the one
over the other; let each have a fair chance, and let neither
be unjustly weighted; but Nature, before birth, has handi
capped the one, and there is no equality between them. It
may be pleaded that where equality was recognised and taught,
there drunkenness and criminality would have fewer victims,
and that then our poor little ones, foredoomed to misery and
vice, would be one of the horrors of the past, no longer tobe found in England. Take it that so it would be, as to a
great extent it would be, although no glory of governmental
purity and nobility can raise men without the will of men to
raise themselves; take it so, because the ideal Republic
is not possible until the men and women who are the Re
public have grown into true manhood and true womanhood,
and have left behind the weaknesses of childhood; yet,
even then, no absolute equality will be found ; some brains
will be larger than others, and some bodies stronger than
others ; never will man be as the work of a craftsman,
turned out by the dozen from the same mould. What, then,
does Equality mean, when we place it in our Trinity of
Hope and of Love? Is it only an empty word without
meaning, with the false jingle of which we seek to deceive,
babbling a falsehood which can never be a truth ? Not
so; Equality has a meaning which makes it worthy of its
high place, mid-way between the Freedom and the Brother
hood of Man. Equality is Justice; absolute Justice to all
alike; Justice which denies to none the right which is his;
Justice which gives to none a right which is not his. Equality
means that in rights, all men are equal; that before the law,
all men are equal; that in law-given opportunities, all men
are equal; that in advantages bestowed, all men are equal.
It means that in life’s race none shall start in artificial
advance of another; that, although strength, and agility,.
�LIBERTY, EQUALITY, FRATERNITY.
7
and endurance must tell in the race itself, yet the racers
shall be placed equal at the starting-post; that the supe
riority must be in the runner, and not gained by an advan
tage in the position from which he begins the race. Equality
implies also that men shall really be born more equal than
they are at present, because from our present inequalities,
from our swollen wealth on the one side and from our
ghastly poverty on the other, we actually labour to increase
the slighter inequalities which Nature would produce, and
we literally breed an inferior race with which to fill our
workhouses and our gaols. Where equality of right is
recognised, we shall gradually decrease inequalities of
Nature, and we shall raise the race itself to a higher level,
until, in the march upwards, until, in the developments of
a more glorious Humanity, the poorest and the lowest in
those happier times will be the superiors of the noblest and
the proudest of our heroes of to-day.
There remains Fraternity : Fraternity, without which no
Liberty is possible, except the fierce liberty of the beast of
prey, living alone and in enmity with all; Fraternity, with
out which no Equality can exist, unless it be an equality of
barbarism, where each lives by himself and through himself,
and owes nought to his fellow. For Fraternity none need
plead in theory, although we trample it under our feet in
our daily practice; all acknowledge the beauty of brotherly
love, and all would gladly extend its sway; many are care
less of Liberty, and few seek for Equality, but all would
raise an altar to Fraternity, where the smiling goddess might
sit, garlanded in flowers, with the child Love in her arms,
with the moon Peace at her feet, and clothed with the sun
of Joy. And brotherhood may be cultured among us, yet
more easily than Freedom and Justice ; it is the hand which
shall pluck the others, it is the magic wand which shall
create them. Fraternity binds us together, each to each ;
fraternity is the strong cord which shall give to one the
power of the whole. Liberty and Equality can only be
won by combined effort, and combination is only possible as
brotherhood is recognised and felt. This principle can be
acted upon and spread by each of us : in our homes, in
our lives, we can show its beauty ; by the genial word and
the helpful act; by the mere cordial clasp of the hand, which
recognises the brotherhood of the labourer as reverently as
fliat of the noble ; by the steady refusal to deny the right of
e lowest and most degraded, and the constant readiness
�8
liberty, equality, fraternity.
to own the brotherhood and sisterhood of those whom theworld makes outcasts ; by crushing down jealousy and by
following true greatness loyally; by working hand-in-hand
with others to further every noble cause; by joyful self
sacrifice for the common good, and glad free labour for thebenefit of all, we may so spread the principle of Fraternity
in our ranks that, by the force of unity among us, we may
stand all-powerful for attack, and may wrest Liberty from
the grasp of oppressors, and erect the statue of Equality on
the ruins of privilege and favouritism. Liberty, Equality,
Fraternity: it is our motto, our cry, our badge. As the
Christian wears the cross, and the Mahommedan is known
by the crescent, so might Republicans be known by this
symbol of their creed ; engraven on the ring, on the locket,
on the ornament, it might speak with silent eloquence of
the hope which we struggle to realise, of the faith in which
we work, of the aspirations by which we live; and, dead,
it might hallow our tombs, as the sacred ideal to which we
strove to conform our lives, and as the promise of the dawn
of a gladder to-morrow, which shall be won for those who
come after us by our labour or by our deaths.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Liberty, equality, fraternity
Description
An account of the resource
Edition: 3rd ed.
Place of publication: London
Collation: 8 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Printed by Annie Besant and Charles Bradlaugh. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Besant, Annie Wood [1847-1933]
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Freethought Publishing Company
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[188-?]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N068
Subject
The topic of the resource
Republicanism
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Liberty, equality, fraternity), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Equality
Liberty
NSS
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/d19d5fde2c9fea7a6a74dd56095bbffe.pdf?Expires=1779926400&Signature=inYTBkGMZ4bzrGnaKTQqqMnll-FKbwDBY9XpvDU3r9c6Q9eW8NHNNofgjNtwpCkJZDPPCd5nNPiiudEd26ZZlRX7rAfk0kKZKo80iRAx84GvBhQvx2C8g45NK4ZKWshlYM4mG1V2aByuVr5Og3vgztGG74ucV3qHBqdp7iFi%7EnqsRr3RabRRnpRj%7ECEKyRxy1aepqfE01sftlwhpky8HUzRPu6tqJvX72qa0xSouOhg84wk1xEg7J3DgA3SBJOkAcK6BSLticICqxgG5Ovw3B1UMFOwDQKfDo%7EqMCDNE4eK959J8XOoa67RyQQTExwimcAvEWFlEDiXHOCnkvJau4g__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
58943ba82f323d48f00837847442d178
PDF Text
Text
£6^
THE
SOCIAL QUESTION.
y
'
•
•
A SPEECH DELIVERED BY
Deputy
JOHANN JACOBY,
TO HIS CONSTITUENTS OF THE SECOND ARRONDISSEMENT
OF BERLIN, ON THE 20th JANUARY, 1870
■“ Men shall not be masters and servants, for all are born to liberty.”
Abraham Lincoln.
PRINTED FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION.
1870.
��OmL QUES TIO N.
T
Dear Fellow Citizens and Friends,
The mandate you have confided to me expires with the close of
the present session of Parliament. I am happy that this meeting
of my constituents gives me an opportunity of thanking you
once more for the confidence you have so faithfully and truthfully
continued to place in me at a time when political convictions are
vacillating in the extreme.
The last time I addressed you from this tribune, I essayed to
n . t
xi.„ —n—„„„
w
.Xgtuiwh'A
bpd J1 ftk tyd
twfil
nj.
M VA ..rt'ioi’ixj 'ifcbVi-M
4‘'-5luofi OS jrp’/,
.Axniii'c*
M>i
/’ ,
'
<fv
>1
■! b/ir*
-.■ii
WP
■■
‘ .
’^301.8W»j MfuJl
* ww
*•
«w‘t '< ♦
“ ini r.tAjitiru 'i-
■’ M0
tfii.ll id "
M JjW ln-i’
'**
l
jaeailBd.Ktoui Li ■>'
' •*»»»<> »•■)-H-sn* *n few’ ■'1 ■
nut you ail Knowxnavcms-wonuei-xia-s
git«o
«
been realised, without the aid of the gods, in the most natural
manner in the world, namely, by insight into the laws and by em
ployment of the forces of nature; that which appeared formerly
impossible to the wisest of the Greeks, is realised daily under
our eyes. But how has this miracle come about ? How has this
happy result been brought to pass, which Aristotle anticipated, of
such a state of things ?
Experience teaches us that by the grand mechanical discoveries
which have been made in our time, national riches have imEneasurably increased, but that the unfortunate and painful lot
of the laborious classes has been at best but ameliorated.
’
�ERRATA.
Page 1, last line, for “ laborious,” read labouring.
Page 5, line 14 from bottom, for “ restoring,” read restricting.
Page 7, line 20 from top, after “ credit,” put a comma.
Page 7, line 3 from bottom, for “ gem,” read germ,.
Page 8, line 22 from bottom, for “ only,” read on.
Page 10, line 14 from top, for “ these,” read other.
Page 12, line 10 from top, after “ does,” put ratf.
Page 12, line 2 from top, for “verum,” read rerum. Same page
line 2 from bottom, for K law ” read labour.
Page 16, line 13 from bottom, after the word “ majority,” insert
—of mankind as wage-labourers.
�TH E
S 0 C I A L QUESTION.
Dear Fellow Citizens and Friends,
The mandate you have confided to me expires with the close of
the present session of Parliament. I am happy that this meeting
of my constituents gives me an opportunity of thanking you
once more for the confidence you have so faithfully and truthfully
continued to place in me at a time when political convictions are
vacillating in the extreme.
The last time I addressed you from this tribune, I essayed to
explain to you the end which the radical German party had in
view, and above all, its position with regard to the working men’s
agitation; permit me to-day to take as the subject of my deli
beration, this working men’s movement itself, or, as it is
ordinarily termed, the social question. The political and social
conditions of a country being intimately allied, every elector has
a right to demand a declaration of social as well as political faith
from his deputy. I shall endeavour to answer this question with
entire frankness. Aristotle, one of the greatest thinkers of
humanity, divides mankind into two classes—free men and men
born for slavery. He pretends that the Greeks, thanks to their
independent character, were called to dominate over other nations,
whilst the barbarian races were destined either to be governed or
for slavery. He sees a social necessity in this institution—he
considers it as an essential and indispensable basis of the State
and of society; for supposing that free citizens should find them
selves under the necessity of providing by their labour for the
needs of life, whence could arise the desire to form their intellect,
and the leisure to occupy themselves with affairs of State ? And
yet, gentlemen, we find in Aristotle a remarkable passage con
cerning the possibility of a state of society without slavery. If
there were animated instruments (automatons) he says, capable
of rendering us those services now performed by slaves; if each
of these instruments, comprehending or even acting in advance
of the wish of man, could execute the labour confided to him
after the manner of the Statutes of Daedalus and the tables of
Hephaestus, which, according to Homer, entered of their own
accord into the chambers of the gods; if the shuttles could
weave alone, and guitars could perform melodies without musi
cians, then weavers would have no need of workmen, nor masters
of slaves.
But you all know that this wonder has in great part already
been realised, without the aid of the gods, in the most natural
manner in the world, namely, by insight into the laws and by em
ployment of the forces of nature; that which appeared formerly
impossible to the wisest of the Greeks, is realised daily under
our eyes. But how has this miracle come about ? How has this
Bappy result been brought to pass, which Aristotle anticipated, of
such a state of things ?
Experience teaches us that by the grand mechanical discoveries
which have been made in our time, national riches have immeasurably increased, but that the unfortunate and painful lot
of the laborious classes has been at best but ameliorated.
�4
Permit me now, in conformity with, enlarged experience, fur
ther to develop the dream of Aristotle. Let us suppose that in
some distant future of the human race, the entire soil of the
globe shall have passed into a state of private property, and that
man, by the progress of science, shall have acquired the mastery
of nature, that the inventions of mechanism shall have attained
such a state of perfection, that machines shall be constructed,
and shall practise by means of other machines, so that all phy
sical labour shall have become superfluous, . or that at least its
necessity shall have been reduced to a minimum. What would
be the result of such a state of things ?.
It will then naturally happen that in virtue of the force of
attraction, which the greater capital exercises upon the lesser,, a
relatively small number of rich persons will find themselves in
the possession of all the machines and all the means of labour;
it is to this small number alone to whom the common revenues of
the country will accrue, as well as all the wealth which is neces
sary for the wants and the pleasures of life, and that from a
point of view now admitted as just.
But what would happen under such circumstances—and granted
the complete depreciation of labour—what would become of the
disinherited mass of the working proletariat, if the charity of
the possessors of capital did not come to their rescue ?
What other resource would remain open to these unfortunate
people, but the alternative of dying of hunger, or modifying
in their own favour the existing relationships of society and
of property, either by force or by fraud ?
It will be said that this is a vain phantom, proposed to frighten
us, and that a similar state of society will never be realised,
either in the present or in the future. I admit this—not how
ever, because the thing in itself is impossible—but because it is
impossible that intelligent men will allow matters to reach such
a point. But can we hide from ourselves the fact that existing
social life, based as it is upon the domination of capital, and upon
the system of wages, tends to such a direction, that unless
obstructed, it would lead us nearer every day towards a state like
that we have just described ? Must we not acknowledge, that
even at the present time, the distribution of the common revenues
of the country is made in such a manner that, at least, a part
of the working proletariat is exposed to the distress we have
depicted.
In such a condition of things, it is the incumbent duty of every
honest and thoughtful man, to put to himself the following
question:—
How can we modify the present relations of society and
property, so as to realise a more equitable distribution of the
common revenue, and to obviate the distress of the working
classes, which daily assumes more extended proportions ?
In examining more closely the problem, the solution of which
we seek, there are two principal features which characterise the
economic relationships of the existing order of society, and which
�5
distinguish it from those of the past—the system of wages and great
^collective industry.
In the past, the social labours were executed in a great measure
by slaves or serfs; since the great French Revolution, there have
no longer existed seignorial rights of man over man.
By right, that is to say legally, every workman is free and dis
poses of himself, but in the fact, he is anything but independent.
Deprived of the necessary means and conditions of labour, with
out any other property but the faculty of labour, he sees himself
[under the necessity of working in the service of another foi'
|c wages,” and for wages which scarcely suffice for the bare
maintenance of life. If he finds no demand for the sole mer
chandise he has to dispose of, that is to say, for his labour, he
falls with those depending on him into extreme misery. Not
withstanding this painful and precarious situation, a labourer
■could with difficulty be found, who would return to the ancient
social state; what he wants is an existence worthy of a man, and
he knows that it is in liberty alone that he can attain it.
As the French Revolution declared the labourer free as regards
his person, it also delivered property from the fetters of the
middle ages; without regard to primitive obligations and destina
tions, it gave him who was then in possession the absolute right
to dispose of his property.
This liberation of property, the employment of steam which
soon followed, and the general introduction of machinery into
workshops, introduced great and weighty changes into economic
End social relations. Trades and small commerce were more or
less driven into the background: commerce upon a large scale,
End great industry, that is to say, production by capital, took
their place. Nevertheless, painful as became the situation of the
poorer workman and of the small dealer by this change, the
Advantages of great collective industry are too important with
regard to the development of civilisation for society ever to forego
them. A return to small commerce and to small trade is for the
future as impossible as a return to statute labour.
In consequence, we must confine our question to the following
■Propositions:—
How can we, without restoring the liberty of labour, and
without prejudicing the progress obtained by industry (on a large
scale), realise a more equitable distribution of the common
revenue, and one more suited to the interest of all ?
The answer for us at least cannot be a doubtful one; there is
■but one means which can lead us to this end : The abolition of the
wage-system and the substitution in its place of co-operative labour.
Whoever can read the signs of the times, will not deny that
this is the thought, which more or less consciously is at the
bottom of all working men’s movements in every country of
Europe. Just as slavery and serfdom, which were also formerly
held to be necessary social institutions, have everywhere given
way to the wage-system, so impends to-day a revolution of the
same kind, and not less important; namely, the transition of the
�wage-system to labour, and labour free and equal in the right of
association. It is needful so to act, that this revolution be effected
in the most peaceful manner, which cannot happen except by
the unanimous concurrence of all the social forces interested in it.
The question which now occupies us should therefore be thus
stated:—
What must (1st) the workman, (2nd) the manufacturer—the
possessor of capital, (3rd) the State do, to advance the transition
already commenced towards production by association, and to
conduct it to a good issue in the interests of the community ?
We see that, to answer this question, we have nothing to do but
review the facts which are occurring before us, a certain proof
that we find ourselves at present in the midst of a social change.
(1.) With regard to the workman himself, it is needful, above
all, that he should have a clear idea of his position, and that
he should learn to know and to respect the noblei’ side of human
nature that is within him.
We have already said that, in general, the wages of the labourer
suffice only for the miserable support of himself and of his
family. If any one doubts this pitiful condition of wages, we
would refer him to the testimony rendered some time back by a
Commission of the Customs to Parliament, in a report upon the
estimate of the wages of workmen; it is written in striking terms.
“ We cannot allow the assertion that there is a sensible differ
ence between the wages of the workman and the means necessary
for his bare maintenance to pass unnoticed. The amount of
wages is precisely the point around which the whole of the social
question practically moves. Workmen affirm the insufficiency of
wages, the employers do not contest this in principle, but they
declare the amount of wages to be a fixed link in the chain of
economic phenomena, and that under the control of the market
in which they find themselves, they cannot arbitrarily change it
without breaking the whole chain. As long as this contest is not
decided, and we fear that it may be eternal (sic), we must rest
ourselves as being the sole point of any real solid foundation
upon the opinion that the two terms, ‘wages’ and ‘means of
indispensable existence,’ generally compensate each other.” “ The
indestructible chain of economic phenomena!” Really one could
scarcely find a more striking expression ! Doubtless, the lords of
capital and the dispensers of labour will not be impeded in the
accumulation of capital upon capital; but very heavily does this
“ chain of economic phenomena ” weigh upon the working classes.
And yet here again the saying of the poet confirms itself—
“ There dwells a spirit of good even in that which is evil! ”
The dominant industrial system whilst necessitating the
assemblage of large masses of labourers in the same locality,
furnishes at the same time the first step for doing away with the
evil it engenders. As man learns from a glass the knowledge of
the features of his own face, so the salaried workman attains to a
complete acquaintance of his situation only by perceiving his own
�7
•condition reflected m the common misery of his companions in
suffering. In common with his equally ill-favoured and equally
oppressed companions, by constant intercourse and exchange of
ideas with his equals, by the mutual co-operation of reciprocal
assistance and of defence against the common danger, there is
developed by degrees among the workmen a bond of brotherhood,
which supports individuals, educates them, and urges the whole
body to struggle for their social rights. It is a singular occur
rence that it should be production by capital that itself assembles
and disciplines the forces destined to put an end to the domination
of capital and of the classes which represent it.
It is from these great industrial agglomerations that the work
ing men’s movement has arisen, which for this last ten years has
spread itself from England to France, to Belgium, to Germany,
to Switzerland, and has acquired by the foundation of the International Association a precise form and a positive power. On all
sides we find societies taking root, whose object is the amelioration
-of the material condition of the working classes; societies of
bartizans and of labourers, associations for instruction, for assist
ance, for consumption, for advances, and for credit unions for
manufacture and production. It is to be foreseen, that under the
pressure of prevailing financial and economical relationships,
all these institutions proceeding from the workman alone, and
founded upon the principle of “ self-help,” will prove insufficient
in the face of the common wants. But their services will have
been considerable in aiding the intellectual and moral development of the working class and in starting a serious reform in the
condition of labour. The true meaning of the inappreciable value
of these associations consists in that, irrespectively of their spe
cific end, they form a school for the members of the Association,
and render them capable of managing their own affairs as well as
of co-operating efficaciously with others. By education, by pro
gress in the knowledge of affairs, and by the development of a
friendly lien among the workmen, they prepare them insensibly
to pass from the wage-system now in vigour to the system of
production by association, which is that of the future.
It was the spirit of association which elevated the laborious
citizen class, in the middle ages, to such a high degree of civiliza
tion, of well being, of power, and of importance. The awakening
of this spirit of association, will lead us in our own days to
■results, similar, yet more fruitful, not for a single state, but
for the entire human society.
The labour question, as we understand it, is not a question of
mere bread and money ; it is a question of justice, of civilization,
and of humanity. Our pretended saviours of the State and
Society, “ the glorious conquests of politics by blood and iron,”
will long, like a superannuated legend, have fallen into the profoundest oblivion, when it will be accorded as a merit to our time
to have awakened and fostered the spirit of association, the gem
■of human virtue and greatness. By this means, our epoch will
have laid the foundations of a new social life founded upon the
�8
principles of equality and fraternity. The creation of the mosh
insignificant working man’s association, will be to the future his
torian of civilization of more importance than the sanguinary
day of Sadowa 1
Let us proceed now to the second question.
(2.) What ought the manufacturer, the enterprising possessor!
of capital, to do ?
All we ask of him is simply to consider in each workman, “ the
man; ” we ask of him to recognise, and to treat the hired man
he employs as a being who has exactly the same rights as him
self—in one word, as his equal.
Every medal, it is said, has two sides; in this saying there is a
good deal of populai' good sense; the most difficult problems of
science and of life find therein a satisfactory solution. Just as
the medal, man also has two sides: the one peculiar to
him as an individual; the other general, stamping him as
a member of a great community. In fact, these two sides are
inseparable and without a defined limit, for it is but in their
entirety, and in their unity that they constitute man; but it is
nevertheless possible that one of these two sides, temporarily or
lastingly, may manifest itself in excess, and thus exercise a decisive
influence upon our thoughts and upon our actions.
Let us suppose, for example, that it is the more particular or
individual side, which allows itself to be felt and becomes pre
ponderate in the conscience of a man. First of all, there will
result a more exaggerated appreciation of personality, a deeper
sentiment of his personal value and a greater confidence in self.
“Aid yourself! man is his own architect.” This is one man’s
motto, the rule of his thought and his actions. If he preserves at
the same time his sentiment on the other side, that is only the
general side of his existence, if he does not lose sight of the
entirety, which binds him to his equals, he will say, that his own
isolated forces will not suffice to procure for himself a life worthy
of a man; that man can only live and prosper in the society of
his fellow creatures, and that a fraternal co-operation with others
is his interest if well understood.
Reverence for others, the sentiment of community and the
spirit of fraternity, will constitute the necessary counterpoise to
his egotism and self-confidence. But the case is quite different
when this personal egotism develops itself to excess. Even
then he will doubtless not overlook the insufficiency of his
isolated individual power, for the consciousness of the general
and universal side can never be completely stifled, but it is th J
consequences which he therefrom deduces, which are quite
different; he will consider other men not as beings who are his
equals, not as members of a great whole to which he himself
belongs, and in which they have all equal rights with himself, butas members subordinated to his individual self, as simple instru
ments, destined to the satisfaction of his own wants and desires.
It is thus that the personal feeling, so laudable in itself, degene
rates into egotism—confidence in self into arrogance. Cupidity*
�9
pride, ambition, will decide him to make of his neighbour a
servant of his will, and of that which he deems his own interest.
What we have just said of each, man in particular is true also
of man in the abstract; the same forces which act upon the
mind of the individual, act also upon the life of peoples, and
upon the history of the human race.
Domination of man over man, right of the stronger, exploitation of the weaker, these are the characteristic features, which,
distinguished alike the history of antiquity and that of the middle
ages. Is it otherwise at the present time ?
Does not social ordei’ even to-day, notwithstanding our boasted:
progress, repose upon the same principle of human servitude ?
Has the present epoch, in truth, a right to contemplate with,
pride and satisfaction its present state in contrast to the social,
relations of pagan antiquity, and the Christianized middle ages ?
With a frankness which cannot well be surpassed, a statesman
of the nineteenth century, Count Joseph de Maistre, thus ex
presses himself. “ The human race has been created for the
benefit of a few. It is the business of the clergy, of the nobility,
and of the high functionaries of state, to teach the people thatwhich is good or bad, true or false, in the moral and intellectual
world. The rest of mankind have no right to reason on such
subjects, and must suffer all things without a murmur.”
If the style is somewhat highly-coloured, the portrait is taken
from nature. As long as the leaders of the people “ shall make
war without consulting the people; as long as ecclesiastics shall
unite in council or] in synod to give judgment under the auspices
of the Holy G-host, upon the false science of man,” we shall have
no right to give a denial to de Maistre. His error consists alone
in approving a similar state of things, and of supposing that such
a state can and ought to last for ever.
Allow me to cite another testimony. From this double view
the truth will be elicited.
Robert Owen, the founder of the co-operative system in Eng
land, meets one day in the house of a Frankfort banker, therenowned statesman, Frederick von Gentz. Owen expounded his
socialistic system and displayed its excellence; if union could,
but replace disunion all men would have a sufficiency. “ That is
very possible 1 ” replied von Gentz, “but we by no means wish that
the masses should become at ease and independent of us, all
government would then be impossible.”
This, gentlemen, is in two words the social question of the
present time ! For Owen the enigma of the solution is, “union.”
Gentz indicates the source of the evil which opposes this
solution, “ the spirit of domination among the privileged classes.”
Aristotle, you will remember, also divided mankind into two
classes: the one destined by nature to dominion, the other
to servitude; but this difference was to be attributed to nation
ality, and it was the character of the Greek or the barbarian,,
which was the basis of his distinction. De Maistre and Gentz,
Hon the contrary, established a distinction in the same race,
�10
between a limited aristocracy called to power and well being,
and the rest of the masses condemned to be governed and to
suffer want.
If we consider the relationships of the Church, the State, or
of society in general, everywhere, we cannot conceal from our
selves the fact, that the domination of classes and the system of
tutelage, such as it existed in the middle ages, are to be found.
The only difference between the present and the past is that,
thanks to the reform in Germany and the revolution in France,
these convictions penetrate daily into lower and lower strata of
society, and this state of things cannot last long.
It is now understood that man is not born to be governed,
lorded over, condemned, and despoiled by his fellow-men; it
is now exacted in fact, from the State and society, that these
doctrines be seriously applied.
There was a time, and the oldest among you may remember it,
when he who placed a doubt upon the right of absolute rule
was declared a “ rebel.” In the same manner is treated in the
present day, whosoever dares to shatter the chain of economic
relations. Endeavour to attack the privileges of the well-to-do
classes, the abuses of power of the great capitalists, the dominant
system of credit; or only to talk of a more equitable distribution of
material rights, in a certain sphere, you will be at once condemned
as an enemy of all social order, as a heretic towards society and as
a communist. But do not let this impede us from frankly and
openly recognising this truth—that all individual property,
material no less than intellectual, is at the same time the com
mon good of society. Just as man, so has the property of man
also its particular side, which makes it the property of the in
dividual, and its general and universal side, upon which the
community have positive claims. That the State and the com
mune levy rates and taxes upon the fortune of each in di vidua,!,
that the law should limit the disposal of property in each, is
legitimate in the eyes of all.
But we demand, has not the proprietor other duties besides
those which the law of the State prescribes, and when necessary
imposes ? Has he not duties towards society, as he has towards
his family, the community, and the Church ?
Is the sum total of what each man possesses in goods, real or
personal, the product of his own activity ? Is he not indebted
for the greater part of it to the co-operation of others, to the
common and social labour of his predecessors and his contem
poraries ? As the individual cannot attain property without the
assistance and succour of others, so neither can he enjoy its
fruits without the assistance and succour of others. It is only in
society that property can have any value, it is only in society that
man can enjoy his property. The moral duty of every proprietor is
therefore to make such a use of his property, as shall profit not
himself alone, but also the community at large, and especially
that part of it less liberally endowed than himself.
“ Riches are the wealth of all, when it is a man of worth who
possesses them.”
�11
The remarkable working-men’s movement of the last forty
years has produced excellent results in this respect. It has
awakened in the workman a sense of his social rights, and in the
well-to-do classes a sense of social duty. We willingly acknow
ledge this; there are manufacturers to whom the workman is not
a machine to be bought, like any other merchandise, at the lowest
possible cost, in order to make the greatest profit, and then to be
got rid of.
In England, France, and with us also in Germany, there are
manufacturers, enterprises, commercial men, and great landed
proprietors who make it a duty to ameliorate the hard lot of the
workmen they employ, by raising their wages and reducing their
hours of labour, by organising savings’ banks, benefit societies
for succour and for old age, by procuring healthy habitations
for their workmen, and, at a small cost, asylums, hospitals,
schools, &c. We designate in particular the system known
under the name of participation in benefits (industrial partner
ship), by which the workman, besides his wages, obtains a share
in the profits arising from his labour. In England alone,
more than 10,000 workmen find themselves in this position with
regard to the manufacturers, and the two parties have reason
to be contented with the result.
But let us not forget that here again, all depends more or less
upon the good will of the employer, and that under the most
favourable supposition, only isolated workmen or groups of workmen find their condition ameliorated. However profitable these
efforts may be as a means of education and preparation, they
are not less insufficient as a remedy for the social evil arising
from the system of wages, than the efforts made by the workmen
themselves. To obtain this remedy another power is needed,
that shall act in a general manner and upon all points.
And this leads us to our third question:—
(3.) What is to be done by the State to obtain a peaceable
solution of the labour question ?
The new Constitution of the Canton of Zurich, of the date of
“the 18th April, 1369, gives us the following answer:—■
“ Art. 23. The State promotes and facilitates the development
of Association founded upon the efforts of individuals (self-help).
It decrees by the agency of legislation all the necessary measures
for the protection of the workman.
“Art. 24. It institutes a Cantonal Bank, with the object of
developing a general system of credit.”
The primary drawing up of this project was yet more precise :
it ran as follows :—
“Art. 23. It is the duty of the State to protect and to further
the well-being of the working classes, as well as the free develop:ment of Associations.”
Art. 24. As above.
Protect and further—these two expressions clearly and precisely
denote the end of the great Association termed the State.
But what are we to understand from this direct protection and
furtherance by the State ?
�12
The despot also terms himself the protector of the people, and
war is extolled as a means for advancing civilization. Vera verum
vocabula amisimus. “ The real sense of words has been lost to us.”
It is all the more necessary to explain the sense attached to these.
The protection of the State means to us, the duty incumbent
upon each community constituted into a State to procure for each
individual, in the free development and manifestation of his
faculties, a sufficient protection, in so far as it shall not militate
against the liberty of others.
Protection alone, however, does constitute the entire duty of
the State; notwithstanding, that certain politicians limit it tothis, the mutual advancement of the members of the State must
necessarily be added.
“ By the advancement by the State ” we understand, the duty
of the community to interfere by every means in its power wherethe providence of the individual will not suffice to ‘procure him an
existence worthy of a man.
As the protection of the State answers to the principle o£
“ liberty,” and the advancement by the State to that of “ frater
nity,” it results that protection and advancement become at the
same time, and according to their respective needs, the lot of
each, and that thus the principle of equality is satisfied.
You see, gentlemen, that the social doctrine I have put forward
is the same as that which I summarised, upon a previous occasion,,
in the following formula:—
Each for all—this is the duty of man.
All for each—this is the right of man.
But what, some one will ask, if protection and advancement by
the State is to be equally the lot of each, why is the working class
specified in the Zurich Constitution ?
The working class—is it to be a privileged one on the part of theState, and favoured at the expense of the others ? This objection;
is a specious one at first sight, but it will not sustain a closer
examination.
Let us recollect, first of all, that the equality of all consists in
that each is protected and supported according to his wants, and
who can deny that in our time, it is exactly the wage-receiving
class who have need of protection and support ?
Moreover, allowance being made for the most pressing needs,,
another circumstance here presents itself, which for the present,
as well as for the impending future, imposes the duty upon theState of having especial regard to the situation of the working
classes, in order to hasten the advent of the justice which
equalises and reconciles.
Consider only the origin of what is ordinarily termed “ capi
tal,” and you will at once understand what I mean.
However different may be the ideas formed of capital, all theworld agrees in considering it as an economised labour, accumu
lated and destined for productive purposes. But who, we ask,
has furnished this law ? Is it those who possess the capital ?
Do the manufacturer, the merchant, and the great proprietor owe
�13
pffeir capital, this accumulated labour, to their own activity and
to that of their ancestors ?
On the other hand, is the want of capital, the poverty of the
labourer, and the proletarian, merely the consequence of his own
faults and of those of his ancestors ? No one will dare aver this ?
If, therefore, the actual inequality in fortunes is not alone the
result of the economic system of those who possess, and of the
anti-economic system of those who do not possess, to what other
cause must we attribute this inequality?
How does it happen that, day by day, capital accumulates in
the hands of a small minority, whilst tbe majority of the wages
scarcely suffice, notwithstanding the labour, for the needs of the
masses ?
It is evident that one must seek the solution in the iniquitous
redistribution of the return of labour in respect of the labour
provided.
Listen to what one of the most celebrated political economists
of England says upon this question—
“ The produce of labour,” says Stuart Mill, “ is redistributed
.at the present time in an almost inverse ratio to the labour sup
plied: the greatest return falls to the lot of those who never
work: after these, to those whose work is only nominal, and thus
in a descending scale, wages are reduced in proportion as the
labour becomes more onerous and more disagreeable, until at last
that which is the most fatiguing and pernicious to the body can
.scarcely secure with certainty the acquisition of the immediate
necessities of existence.”
We will not inquire by what concatenation of historical events
the labourer has been by degrees deprived of the means of labour,
and how the disproportion which exists between wages and labour
has been brought about. The question before us is the following:—
What has the State done to obtain a more equitable distri
bution of the products of labour ?
Has it ever tried either by laws or by other institutions to pro
tect the labourei’ against the preponderance of capital and to
place a limit to the social inequality which daily increases ?
If we examine the history of all States, we shall find that up to the
latest times, nothing or nearly nothing has been done in this respect.
The nobility, the clergy, or the higher civic class have exercised
for centuries, one after the other, or at the same time, an almost
exclusive influence upon public affairs; they have never hesitated
to employ the power and resources of the State which ought to
be the inheritance of all for themselves and for their particular
interests. Legislation itself, far from producing equality in com
petition and in economic relationships, has contributed by con
ceding privileges on the one side, and by limiting liberty on the
other, to enlarge the social gulf between those who possess and
those who do not.
How can we then be astonished that working men, having at
last attained the consciousness of their rights and of their
strength, exact from the State that it shall take into particular
�14
consideration their interests so long neglected? If the Con
stitution of Zurich accords to the labourers alone the protection
and assistance of the State, it is not a violation of the principle?
of equality. It is not a question here, as some timid minds fear,
to maintain the needy workman at the expense of the well-to-do
citizens; much less is it a question to create, by a lasting
assistance on the part of the State, a kind of labour feudality |
the legislator was only desirous to recognise in a frank and loyal
manner, that a duty was incumbent upon the State to make
amends for the past, to efface the injustices committed, and to
remedy the social evil it has contributed to produce. It is merely
a question how to realise what we have called the demands of an
equalising and reconciling justice.
The Constitution of Zurich does not content itself, it is true, by
proclaiming in general terms the duties and obligations of the
State; it indicates at the same time, in clear terms, the means by
which we can come to the aid of the working class.
“ The State must favour and facilitate the development of
association founded upon personal effort.”
The final end of this development is the cessation of the wage
by the insensible transition of the wage-system to that of free
labour through the means of association.
Let us now survey, one after the other, the exigencies which are
imposed upon the State, that is to say, on the body of the citizens.
In the first place, is the absolute liberty of manifesting one’s
opinion and the unlimited right of meeting and association. We
must renounce all limitation or, according to the usual term,
regiementation (organisation) of liberty.
Hence the equal right of each to participate in political life,
whence results universal and direct suffrage, and, as a necessary
consequence, the direct and universal participation of the people
in legislation and in administration.
We ask, moreover, gratuitous instruction in public institutions
which should be independent of the Church, and the establish
ment of a popular militia in the stead of permanent armies. We
combine these two propositions, the one with the other, for the
instruction and the military training of the people find them
selves in mutual relationship; to make war, above all, money
is needed, and capable soldiers, and both are obtainable by
means of good schools. The wealth of a country depends upon
the productive labour of its inhabitants, and labour is the more
productive, in so far as the labourer is able to calculate the pro
duct of his own activity, that is to say in proportion to his
intelligence. And as the labourer, so also does the soldier by means
of education become more able to perform his task, which is to
defend his country. With us, and with the majority of European
countries, nearly half the revenues of the State are expended in
preparations for war, whilst insignificant sums are awarded to
educational instruction. Reverse this order of things, and the
public income will be increased tenfold, without the respective
value of things diminishing.
�15
A minister of instruction, who understands his business, is at
once the best minister of war and of finance.
For the working classes in particular, and that having in view
the general interest, we ask—
Seduction of the hours of labour, and a fixation of the day’s
work.
The paid labourer (or receiver of wages) must also have time
and the leisure to form his mind and watch the affairs of the
State. The congress of the English Working Men’s Associa
tion, which was held in the month of August last year, at Bir
mingham, advises a period of eight hours as a common measure
for all trades and expresses the conviction that by this means,
will be fortified the physical and intellectual energy of the work
man, and we shall thereby further morals, and diminish the
number of the UnemployedProhibition of the employment of children in manufactories,
and an equal rate of wages, both for women as well as for men, are
necessary steps to prevent the diminution of wages, and to
the decline of the rising generation.
Furthermore, we desire the abolition of indirect contributions,
and the establishment of a tax progressive and proportional to
the fortune of the individuaL
Every tax upon consumption, is a tax upon the strength of
the labourer, and consequently, an impediment to the production
of wealth, and a prejudice to the well-being of the people.
Finally, reform of the system of credit, and the furtherance of
associations, both industrial and agricultural, by the means of
the institution of credit, or by the protection of the State.
It is necessary to lay open the road to credit to the work
man. What the State has done hitherto, and to such an extent
directly and indirectly for the support and protection of capital,
it must now effect, and that in its own interest, for the advance
ment of the working classes and working men’s association.
Nothing is so advantageous to the community as justice in all
thin gs.
These are the first conditions of the reform of labour. Work
men have been advised, perhaps with good intentions, to keep
themselves aloof from all politics, and to concentrate all their
attention on their economic interest, as if we could separate
economic and political interests, as we cleave wood with a hatchet.
W'hoever has followed the course of our considerations will not
doubt, I hope, that it is just the working classes whose interest
it mogt imports to modify public relationships on the side of
liberty’ The assistance of the State, no less than that of the
individual, is necessary to secure to each workman the complete
and intact product of his labour, that is to say, the possibility of
an existence worthy of a human being. The State alone can
come to the workman’s aid, and the free State alone will do it 1
Let us now briefly summarise what we have said:—
The wage-system answers now as little to the exigencies of
'ngficc and humanity, as slavery and serfdom in former times.
�16
Just as it was with slavery and serfdom, the wage-system was
formerly a progress by which society has derived incontestable
^advantages.
. The social question of our times consists therefore in the aboli
tion of the wage-system, without prejudice to the advantages
resulting from the common labour of great collective industry.
There is for this but one means, the system of free labour by
association—the co-operative system. The present time is a
transition period from the wage-system (system of production
by means of capital) to the system of labour by association.
In order that this transition may be effected in a peaceful
manner, it is requisite that the workmen, employers, and the
State act in common.
It is the duty of workmen to unite, in ordei* to resist the
oppression of capital and to raise themselves by education to
moral and material independence.
It is the duty of the employer to engage himself in the cause
•of the workman’s well-being in a philanthropic spirit, and espe
cially to accord to him a share of the profits of labour.
Finally, the' State, by the protection of association, by fixing
the hours of labour, and by giving gratuitous instruction, ought
■to further the efforts of workmen towards civilization. Upon
the State devolves, at the same time, the duty of protecting the
system of production by association on a large scale, of a reform
in the system of banks of credit, and of the institution of State
Credit ?
As such help can only be expected from a free State, it is clear
that the workmen and their friends must, before all, procure for
themselves political liberty.
Political liberty, social liberty, liberty of the citizen, without
sacrificing the majority, this is the problem of our era.
The conquests of the blood and iron policy, the din of arms,
which has reverberated in our day, the struggles and the combats
which occur for the sake of dominion and power, for fortune and
for advancement—these are but ripples on the surface of the
stream of time; in the hidden depths, slowly but steadily
advances the science of nature and of mind, and with this
science, the consciousness of the independence of man — the
world-moving idea of the Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity of ali.
Years and years may pass away, and still that saying of the Scrip/ture will be fulfilled—that joyful message which the electric-wire
brought as a first greeting from free America to Europe encum
bered with arms : “ Peace on earth and good will towards men.”
THE END.
Printed by Austin & Co., 17, Johnson’s Court, Fleet Street, E.C.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The social question: a speech delivered by Deputy John Jacoby, to his constituents of the second arrondissement of Berlin, on the 20th January, 1870
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Jacoby, Johann [1805-1877.]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 16 p. ; 19 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Printed by Austin & Co. for private circulation
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1870
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5243
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The social question: a speech delivered by Deputy John Jacoby, to his constituents of the second arrondissement of Berlin, on the 20th January, 1870), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Subject
The topic of the resource
Labour Movement
Socialism
Conway Tracts
Equality
Labour Movement
Political reform
Social Policy
Socialism