BC Historical Newspapers

BC Historical Newspapers Logo

BC Historical Newspapers

Western Clarion Dec 1, 1922

Item Metadata


JSON: wclarion-1.0318957.json
JSON-LD: wclarion-1.0318957-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): wclarion-1.0318957-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: wclarion-1.0318957-rdf.json
Turtle: wclarion-1.0318957-turtle.txt
N-Triples: wclarion-1.0318957-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: wclarion-1.0318957-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

 A Journal of
Official Organ of
No. 880.
EIGHTEENTH YEAR      Twice a Month
The War Documents
"When they invoke against us our Secret Treaty
with Russia, we shall invoke our public Treaty with
humanity." y
(Jean Jaures, at Brussels, July 29, 1914).
THERE lias been published already such a mass
of material  dealing with the  events which
led up to the world war of 1914-18 that at
first glance it would seem superfluous to spend further time and space on the subject.   In any consideration that has been given in this journal heretofore,- or in the literature of the Socialist Party
of Canada generally to the war and its causes, the
prevailing note has been that wars between nations
arise not in defence of the weak against the strong,
not for national honor nor through ideal motives,
but-to advance the material welfare of one national
group of propertied interests as against another,
and that the reasons for alliance of resources between groups are marked out in the routes of trade
and in projected or actual territorial dominance. (In
this connection, if the reader has not already done
so he will do well to read Peter T. Leckie's "Economic* Causes of War."   See Literature Price List,
page 8).    The soundness of that analysis is well
borne out by the facts, and every document that has
any bearing on the war and the diplomatic negotiations concerning it fully bears it out,    It is with
some of these documents wc would    deal    here.
There are Clarion readers in outlying districts, no
doubt, who are unable to follow the investigations
that have been made into the mire of diplomatic
correspondence incidental to the war and the general mass of literature connected with it.
*      •      *
In "The Nation" (N. Y.) Oct. 11, 1922 there appeared an article entitled "They all Lied" by Lewis
6. Gannett, and in the International Relations section of the same number there appeared some excerpts from various official documents, presented
to show that the Entente Powers were not taken by
surprise by the war and that they had been for
years preparing for it.   The "Manchester Guardian" last June carried articles of a similar nature,
showing that the plea of an "unprovoked attack"
on an unsuspecting France and Belgium as the outcome  of a carefully planned German conspiracy^
was voiced by the British government to conceal
the facts of the case, a course which in their judgment was necessary to the success of their  war policy.   We shall come to that in time. The mass of
material is so great as to make it difficult to judge
what to select.   Thc work done in this   particular
field by E. D. Morel (now labor M. P. for Dundee)
has received wide acknowledgment,    Indeed, several books and many articles have been written,
based upon his work, and the documents now coming to light well bear out his conclusions. His point
of view as to the primary power of international
diplomacy in causing.war is subject to question, but
his point of view does not hinder the usefulness for
us of his researches.    We shall acknowledge Mr.
Morel's help beforehand, therefore, for much of our
material in what we have to say.
"The   Nation"   documents  (beforementioned)
are largely based on the "vDe Siebert" documents
and on "Un Livre Noir" (A Black Book).    Our
readers will remember the text of the secret treaties
of the Russian Imperial Archives reproduced from
"Pravda" of Nov. 23 (and later) 1917, in the "New
York Evening Post" and in the "Manchester Guardian." They have now come to be known as the
"First Collection" of the documents of tlie Russian
Imperial Archives. The De Siebert documents are
known as the "Second Collection. — Entente
Diplomacy and the World: Matrix of the History
of Europe, 1909-14. "—Contains in 762 pages 853
documents. (New York: G. P. Putnam and Son.
$12.50). De Siebert was secretary of the Imperial
Russian Embassy in London. The correspondence
of Isvolsky, Russian Ex-Foreign Minister, is contained in the "Third' Collection" to be published in
two volumes, the first of which has already appeared as "A Black Book" under Soviet Government
direction. (No attention is given to these documents
by the press, but every attention is given to Clemenceau, or Lloyd George, or Lord Birkenhead or
whoever is still prominent in maintaining the farcical story about Germany "willing" the war deliberately and exclusively). Lewis S. Gannet quotes also Professor S. R. Fay's "New Light on the Origins
of the War", which is an analysis of Kautsky's disclosures of .the German archives and of those of
Richard Gooss in the Austrian archives. There is a
point Mr. Gannett has missed in his documentation, and that is in quoting Sir Edward Grey's Note
to M. Cambon, French Ambassador to London, No-
vember 22, 1912.   His quotation is quite correct as
it appeared in the British White Book, as follows:
From time to time in recent years the French and
British naval and military experts have consulted together. It. has always been understood that such consultation does not restrict the freedom of either government to decide at any future time whether or not to assist the other by armed force. We have agreed that consultation between experts is not and ought not to be regarded as an engagement that commits either government to action in a contingency that has not arisen and
may never arise. The disposition, for instance, of the
French and British fleets respectively at. the present
moment is not based upon an engagement to cooperate
in war.
You have, however, pointed out that, if either government had grave reasons to expect an unprovoked attack
by a third Power, it. might become essential to know
whether it could in that event depend upon the armed
assistance of the other. I agree that if either Government had grave reason to expect an unprovoked attack
by a third Power, or something that threatened the
general peace, it should immediately discuss, with the
other whether both governments should act together to
prevent aggression and to preserve peace, and if so what
measures they would be prepared to fake in common.
If these measures involved action the plans of the general
staffs would at once be taken into consideration and the
governments could then decide what effect should be
given to them.
That quotation is quite correct, as taken from
the British White Book. But Sir Edward Grey
read that note in his speech to Parliament, August
3, 1914, and he omitted entirely the last sentence,
whieh we have placed in italics. The note as read
by Grev appears in. Hansard (Aurr. 3.'14). Vol. 65,
n. 1813 and is without the last sentence. Viviani,
French Premier, read the full text in the French
Chamber next day. and in full it was incorporated
in the French Yellow Book. So it had to go in the
British White Book in full. Viviani had no need to
hide the truth—that there were definite Anglo-
French military and naval plans laid beforehand,
and jointly agreed upon as disclosed in that last sentence. He could rely upon French Support -against
Germany, in view of the geographical position of
France and the expected response to the French
chauvinist appeal against Germany. But Grey had*
to conceal the policy the British Foreign offiee had
pursued consistently since Lord Lansdowne's term
of office as foreign minister, which' policy had resulted in Avhat has now come to be known as the
"encircling offensive". Grey had to present hiB
case in conformity with the many public declarations made previously by himself and other British
government ministers r that the British Foreign of-
fce had entered into no agreements whatsoever of
a military character with an outside power. Here
is a reference to some of these declarations:
On 10th March 1913, Mr. Asquith, replying to a question in the Commons from Lord Hugh Cecil, denied that
England was under an "obligation arising owing to an
assurance given by the Ministry in *the course of diplomatic negotiations, to send a very large armed force out
of this country to operate in Europe."   On 24th March
1913 he made similar denials in reply to questions from
Sir W. Byles and Mr. King. On 14th April, 1913, Mr.
Runciman in a speech at Birkenhead denied "ih the most
categorical way" the existence of a secret understanding
with any foreign Power. On 3 May 1913 the Secretary
for the Colonies, Mr. Harcourt, declared publicly that
he "could conceive no circumstances in which Continental operations would not be a crime against the people
of this country." On 28 June 1913 the Under-Secretary
for Foreign Affairs, Mr. Acland, declared publicly that
"in no European question are we concerned to interfere with a big army." On July 1, 1913, Lord Loreburn
(Lord Chancellor from 1906 to 1912) said, "that any
British Government would be so guilty towards our country as to take up arms in a foreign quarrel is more than
I can believe."   On 28 April 1914 and again on 11 June
1914 Sir Edward Grey confirmed, in the House of Commons, Mr. Asquith's assertion, made 10 and 24 March
1913, of British freedom from engagements with Continental Powers. (Albert Jay Nocjc. The Myth of a
Guilty Nation. Page 103).
It is thus very easy to see why Grey omitted that
last sentence. His government had denied the ex*-
istence of any committments of such a nature. By
the time the British White Book was published the
nations were at war and the admission was not ther.
subject to effective discussion. In the meantime, on -
3rd Aug. 1914 (same day as Grey's speech), Mr.
Asquith said in the House of Commons:—
If I am asked what we are fighting for, I reply in two
sentences: In the first place, to fulfil a solemn international obligation .... Secondly, we are fighting	
  to vindicate the principle that small nationalities
are not to be crushed in defiance of international good
Thc small nation, of course, was Belgium. The
Belgian appeal was a great help to Sir Edward
Grey. The "treaty" of 1839 was well used. It was
a deyice used to present the case in a false light.
The "German" had to become a "Hun." Let us
quote Mr. Lloyd George as he expressed himself just
eight months before the war broke out:—
The German army is vital, not merely to the existence
of the German Empire, but to the very life and independence of the nation itself, surrounded as Germany is
by other nations, each of which possesses armies about as
(Continued on page 2) PAGE TWO
(Continued from page 1)
powerful as her own. We forget that, while we insist
upon a 60 per cent, superiority (so far as our naval
strength is concerned) over Germany being essential to
guarantee the integrity of our own shores—Germany herself has nothing like that superiority over France alone,
and she has, of course, in addition, to reckon with Russia
on her eastern frontier. Germany has nothing which
approximates to a two-Power standard. She has, therefore, become alarmed by recent events, and is spending
huge sums of money on the expansion of her military resources. (D. Lloyd George in the "Daily Chronicle" (London), January lst, 1914.
But the same Lloyd George altered all that later:
What are we fighting for?   To defeat the most danger-
.ous conspiracy ever plotted against the liberty of nations,
carefully, clandestinely planned in every detail with ruthless,   cynical   determination.   (D.   Lloyd  George,   Queens
Hall, London, 4 August 1917).
The argument of the Allied governments concerning their "unpreparedness" against the "unprovoked attack" precipitated upon them by the
Central Powers falls down, not only through the
story of the course of diplomacy among the Powers
in the eight years (more or less) immediately proceeding 1914, but through an examination of the
military and naval appropriations of the Powers
concerned. Mr. Nock has examined these, and from
1909 to 1914 (inclusive), for naval construction
Great Britain spent £92,672,524 - France spent £43,-
152,909; Russia spent £38,477,605; and Germany
spent £66,099,111. That is to say, in that period
Great Britain, France and Russia combined spent
for naval purposes £240,402,149 against Germany's
£66,099,111. Austria and Turkey are not counted in,
and possible lesser costs either in construction or
upkeep on the Central Powers' side are not considered, but neither is the weight of the Japanese navy
accounted, and in any case the overwhelming superiority of the Allies in this field is beyond a doubt.
In the military field Germany and Austria combined
spent £92,000,000 and Great Britain, France and
Russia £142,000,000 in 1914 (pre war figures). Great
Britain's expenditure for military purposes alone,
appropriated in 1914 before war broke out, considered alone was greater by £4,000,000 than Austria's.
Morel ("Tsardom's Part in the War") says:—
The combined excess of military and naval expenditure of Russia and France in combination over Germany and Austria in combination amounted in the decade
1895—1904 to £247,827,028; and in the decade 1905—14
to  £229,868,853.
The "unpreparedness" argument has no foundation in fact. The late Italian Prime Minister NitS
explains its original purpose very well:
I cannot say that Germany and her allies were solely
responsible for the war which devastated Europe 	
That statement, which we all made during the war, was
a weapon to be used at the time; now that the war is
over it cannot be used as a serious argument. ("Peace-
less Europe," by Francesco Nitti.   Cassel).
Let us go back to 1905, the year Sir E. Grey
succeeded Lord Lansdowne as British Minister for
Foreign Affairs, which post he held until 1916. On
April 4th 1904, Lansdowne and Delcasse (French
Minister for Foreign Affairs) succeeded in effecting
the Anglo-French Agreement over Morocco (See
"Economic Causes of War" page 91.) "The Round
Table," March 1915, quotes the German historian
Rachfahl in that connection as marking a definite
period in the relationships of the Powers:
Under the surface of the Morocco affair lurked the
deepest and most difficult problems of power, it was to
be forseen that its course would prove to be a trial of
strength of the first order.
The Anglo-French rapproaehment was followed
in 1907 by an agreement between Great Britain and
Russia concerning boundaries in Tibet and Afghanistan and the division of Persia. "This Agreement
with Russia," says "The Round Table" (last quoted), "unlike the spirit of the Entente with France,
carried with it no suggestion of the possibility of
common action in the event of German aggression,
though it was facilitated by common apprehension
of German designs."
That even then the press had set itself to deal
carelessly with the truth in matters concerning Germany is evident from this:—
During the years 1905—8 instructions were given to
all continental correspondents of the London "Times" by
Sir Valentine Chirol to suppress everything that might
have a beneficial influence or effect on Anglo-German relations, and magnify and bolster up everything which will
embitter it. ("Revelations of an International Spy," p.
24. By I. T. T. Lincoln, (Liberal M.P. for Darlington,
1910) New York, 1916. Robert M. MeBride & Co.)
I have never seen reference made to Mr. Lincoln's book anywhere. It was written in 1916 and
finished while he was in jail in New York, arrested
at the instigation of the British Consul's Department
there. No doubt the entry of United States into the
war on the side of the Allies silenced his book. It
is; sufficient to note here that the course of diplomacy
covering some ten years before the war as outlined
by him is very well borne out by the documents pub
Hshed since, although it would be hard to find an
author who shows more personal vanity. Sir Valentine Chirol is looked upon as an authority on
questions affecting Jndia, the Far East and the Balkans. He was Director of the Foreign Department,
London "Times" 1899-1912. His instructions as
given above were certainly not issued contrary to
tlie wishes of the British Foreign Office.
Mr. Austin Chamberlain, in the House of Commons, Feby. 8th, 1922 said, "We found ourselves on
a certain Monday (Aug. 3, 1914) listening to a
speech by Lord Grey at this box which brought us
face to face with war, and upon which followed our
declaration. That was the first public notification
to the country or to anyone, by the Government of
the day, of the position of the British Government,
and of the obligations which it had assumed.'' Note
that by this time there is official recognition that the
Government had "assumed obligations," in spite of
the repeated previous denials of Mr. Asquith, Sir E.
Grey, Mr. Runciman, Mr. Harcourt, Mr. Acland
and Lord Loreburn. Besides the official documents
of the war (which we shall come to in time) there
have been published a great many books, diaries,
histories and pamphlets, good, bad and indifferent,
directly bearing on the preparations for war, and on
the events of the war during its progress, among
them Lord Loreburn's "How the War Came," Lord
Fisher's "Memories," Col. Repington's "The First
World War," Lord Haldane's "Before the War,"
Wilfred Scawen Blunt's "Diaries,"—not to forget
Sir Julian Corbett's "Official History of the War."
These round out the story. In his book Lord Lore-
burn escapes from his innocent position of July 1,
1913, in this way:
',-* i * •
We were tied by the relations which our Foreign Office had created, without apparently realizing that they
had created them.
Such a statement as that may appear reasonable
to a Lord Chancellor, but it does not fit the facts. It
is an excuse.
J,t is not without significance that the Campbell-
Bannerman Government in 1905 secured Mir. Hal-
dane (afterwards Lord Haldane) as Minister for
War. Haldane's distinction lay in his attention to
all things German. He specialized in German literature and was styled a "Hegelian." He had translated Schopenhauer. By the aid of, or in spite of
such equipment he (as the "Daily Mail Year Book"
says): "increased the efficiency of the War Office."
Perhaps to justify (even if somewhat belated) his
"The Meaning of Truth in History" of 1914, his
book on the war reveals that in 1906, as MinfsfefTor
War, in conjunction with the French military chiefs
he was set the task of finding how to mobilise, transport, and concentrate at a place "which had been
settled between the staffs of Britain and France,"
160,000 British troops opposite the Belgian frontier.
As the "Official History of the War" says:
Amongst the many false impressions that prevailed,
when after the lapse of a century we found ourselves
involved in a great war, not the least erroneous is the belief that we were not prepared for it. Whether the scale
on which we prepared was as large as the signs of the
times called for, whether we did right to cling to our long-
tried system of a small army and large navy, are questions
that will long be debated; but, given the scale which we
deliberately chose to adopt, there is no doubt that the
machinery for setting our forces in action had reached an
ordered completeness  in detail that has no parallel in
our history      The power of armies they  (the
Germans) could calculate to a nicety—of the power of
the sea they had no experience. All that was plain was
that Great Britain was as ready as ever to play the old
game, and had set the board with all the old skill.
That is devoted to naval operations. So much
for '' unpreparedness!''
It looks as if this article will be as long-drawn
out a process as the war itself. At anyrate, this,
will have to do until next issue. In the meantime
if is well to note that the newspapers are generally
full of war talk these days. We know very well
what wars are about and it is as well to know also
how they come about. When that knowledge is a
general possession there won't be so many good men
among the dead men. E. M.
(To be continued)
By Sid Earp.
TO those who have made a practical study of
the economics of Capitalism, and who clearly
understand its purpose as a social system, the
gloomy faces and confused minds of its supporters
and administrators appear almost comical. The industrial and financial groups now find themselves
at cross purposes. Their political representatives
are howling at one another in a style that marks
them as chatterers devoid of any real understanding of the essential facts of social life. Among
the great mass of the people, stubbornly clinging
to traditional ideas and outworn customs, a merciless individual struggle for life goes on. Truly a
huge social comedy and drama being enacted at
once; may the curtain soon fall! However the Reds
are not downcast; whatever faults may be charged
up to them they are at least adaptive and cheery
in their adaptation. The letters in the "Mail Bag"
from week to week give ample proof of it.
Writing from Ottawa, the seat of governmental
power and wisdom, Com. A. Lescaubeault sends
kindly greetings to Winnipeg and Vancouver comrades. He turns in one sub to the "Clarion," and
says he's on the job for more. From Stratford,
Ont., Com. A. M. Davis sends a short resume of conditions in that district, with a personal opinion,
with which we agree, of the slaves' mind. Also
wishes the Party and the Clarion success in their
effort, and encloses two dollars for a sub and the
Maintenance Fund. A brief and cheerful letter
comes from Com. Goudie, St. Johns, with an enclosure for sub and the Maintenance Fund of $13.50
from the comrades in that city. Bravo! Com. T.
Hanwell sends sub from Brandon. Com. J. Cunningham sends kindly greetings and a renewal of
his sub. from Cabrin, Sask.
From Erskine, Alta. Com. A. McNeil sends a
very interesting letter along with three subs to the
Clarion. Among other things relating to the condition of the farmers he says "that if a lowered
standard of living and all Hint it implies, will only
be conducive to a social change, wc are fast near-
ing the desired goal." He favors the continuance
of the "Mail Bag" column and thinks it will serve
to promote more interest in the Revolutionary
T. Hughes sends a short note from Hillcrest en-
dosing a sub, and W. S. Grott, Hanna, does likewise. Gustave Lee writes a short note with best
wishes from Camrose, Alta.
British Columbia is well represented this time.
Com. T. Roberts is carrying on in Sandon. He
sends a sub and an order for literature with a promise of more to follow. Com. Roy Addy is doing his
bit in Alhambra. He sends in a sub. and renewal.
Com. H. Judd does the same thing from Bracken-
dale. He says the "Clarion" is as necessary to
him as a "fag" is to a "Tommy." The analogy
needs qualifying a trifle, yes?
A bright letter comes from Com. C. F. Orchard
Kamloops. He says Chas. Lestor held a good meeting on Oct, 27th and a deal of good literature was
(Continued on page 4)) *m*jm   ffrf.V...^;   ...
M-*l     i     -■■, *,   . .
Economics for Workers
MARX deals with rent, like all other subjects, from an evolutionary basis. The subject is elaborately analysed through its evolutionary process from primitive labor rent up to
the complicated money rent of today.
He points out that, "Labor Rent is the simplest
and most primitive form of rent,"   This rent, is the
original form  of surplus value.    The  identity  of
surplus value with unpaid labor of others does not
need to be demonstrated by any analysis in this
case, because it existed in a visible form, for the
labor of the direct producer was separated by space
and time from his labor for the landlord, and this
labor appeared in the brutal form of forced labor
for another.   "In the same way the "quality" of
the   soil   to   produce a rent is here reduced to a
tangibly  open secret,  for  the  nature  which  here
furnishes the rent, also includes the human labor-
power bound to the soil, and the property relation
which compels the owner of labor-power to exert
this quality and to keep it busy beyond the measure
required for the satisfaction of his own material
needs.   The rent consists directly in the appropriation, by the landlord, of this surplus expenditure of
labor-power.    For  the   direct   producer   pays  no
other rent.   Here, where surplus-value and rent are
not only identical, but where surplus value obviously has the form of surplus labor, the natural conditions, or limits, of rent lie on the surface, because
those of surplus value do.
"The direct producer must, (1), possess enough
labor-power, and (2), the natural conditions of his
labor, which means in the first place the soil cultivated by him, must be productive enough, in one
word, the natural productivity of his labor must be
so great that the possibility of some surplus labor
over and above that required for the satisfaction of
his own needs shall remain.''
"It is not this possibility which creates the
rent" ("Capital" vol. iii pp. 919-920.
Following labor^rent comes rent in kind. Rent
in kind is the transformation of labor rent and requires a higher stage of economic development. The
direct producer is driven by force of circumstances
rather than direct coercion, or by legal enactment
rather than by the whip to perform surplus labor
on his own responsibility. A surplus beyond his indispensable needs he now produces upon soil exploited by himself and no longer upon the Lord's estate outside of his own land, as under labor rent.
The producer is master of the employment of
his whole labor-time although part of his labor-time
belongs to the landlord, only the landlord does not
get this surplus value in its natural form (labor)
but rather in the natural form of the product in
Which the rent is realized.
The labor of the producer for himself and his
labor for the landlord are no longer separated by
space and time as seen under the system of labor
rent. Today we have reached the stage of money
rent, which also entails a higher economic develop-
The producer no longer turns over the product
but its price to the landlord. Money rent is not only
a reflex of a progressive economic development, but
a transformation of the peasantry of a country into
mere tenants, a freeing of the serfs. This transformation of rent in kind into money rent brought
about the formation of a class of propertyless day
laborers whd hire themselves out for wages.
The surplus labor is not always separated into
rent and profit. Marx says: "Where capitalist conceptions predominate as they did upon the American plantations, this entire surplus value is regarded
i;s profit," "In places where the capitalist mode of
production does not exist, nor the conceptions corresponding to it have been transferred from capitalist countries, it appears as rent. The differences
cf soil fertility or thc advantages to be gained over
inferior soil, or locations for reaching the markets,
are transferred to the landlord in higher rents."
Rogers in his "Political Economy" says: "The
landowners in this country (England) whose influence Was overwhelming in the legislature, were well
enough aware that high prices of agricultural products involved high rent in land.''   This is why the
landowners of Britain endeavoured to maintain the
corn laws.   Rent in land is the surplus over and
above cost of production plus average rate of profit.
If the average produce of a farm is worth £1000
and average cost of production plus profit £800
the average rent inafllibly would be £200 if let by
open competition.   Of course, like other businesses,
exceptional skill or early adaptation of new discoveries may give one an advantage over another,
but this becomes generally diffused and nothing prevents the excess finding its way to the landlord in
the shape of rent   The same condition exists in the
business centres as well as agricultural centres.   If
a trading house in one of the best thoroughfares of
any city, through its location, does a good business
the trader pays more rent because he recovers it
in the business quality of the site.   The same rule
applies in coal mines.   Marx says: "Mining rent, in
its strict meaning, is determined in the same way
as the agricultural rent.   There are some mines, the
product of which barely suffices to pay for the labor
and to produce the capital invested in it together
with the ordinary profit.   They yielded some profit,
to the contractor, but no rent to the landlord.   They
can be worked to advantage only by the landowner,
who in his capacity as a contractor makes the ordinary profit out of his invested capital.   Many coal
mines in Scotland are operated in this way, and cannot be operated in any other way.   The landowner
does not permit anybody to work them without the
payment of rent, but no one can pay any rent for
them."  (Quoting Adam Smith, "Capital," vol iii,
p. 900).
When Marx deals with Monopoly and Absolute
Rent, he says: "If private ownership of land places
obstacles in the way of the equalization of the values
of commodities into prices of production, and appropriates absolute rent, then this absolute' rent is
limited by the excess of the value of the products of
the soil over their prices of production, that is, by
the excess of the surplus value in them over the rate
of profit assigned to the capitals by the average rate
of profit. This difference then forms the limit of the
rent, whieh is always but a certain portion of surplus value produced and existing in commodities."
"Just as the diversion of the newly added value of
commodities into necessary and surplus labor, wages
and surplus value, and its general division between
revenues, finds its given and regulating limits, so
the division of the surplus value itself into profit
and ground rent finds its limit in the laws regulating the equalization of the rate of profit." (Vol. iii,
pp. 1003-1004.)
It is too large a subject to detail like Marx, but
let us see how much the rents of houses are regulated by the same laws as regulate the average
rate of profit. The average worker believes that
every increase of taxes the landlord pays is added
to his rent, and trades councils and other labor
bodies talk about paying the taxes. A discussion in
the New York "Times" a number of years ago during municipal elections was put very clearly.
"Rents do not rise with taxes, if they did the owner
would merely pass the taxes on to the renter and be
rid of the subject"   The next day Mayor Gaynor
in a letter to the "Times" quoted a message he had
sent to the council the previous year: "Every landlord knows that he cannot add the taxes to the tenant's rent. If he could, he would not care how high
taxes grew. He would simply throw them on his
tenants." The landlords of Ottawa are aware of
this as they invariably vote down money bylaws
which would increase taxes.
The excuse made of increasing rents because of
increased taxes can only be performed when houses
are scarce and profit of investment in house building is too low to stimulate house building, making
the demand for houses exceed the supply.   This wc
have seen during the war period.   Even Winston
Churchill grasps some valuable facts in regards to
rent.   In his great liberal days and during Lloyd
George's   land   reform   campaign   Churchill said:
"If there is a rise in wages, rents are able to move
forward because the workers can afford to pay a
little more.   If the opening of a new tramway or
the institution of an improved service of workman's
trains or the lowering of fares, or a new invention,
or any other public conveyance affords a benefit to
the workers in any particular district, it becomes
easier for them to live there and therefor the landlord, and the ground lord, one on top of the other,
are able to charge them more for the privilege of
living there."   I have illustrated this same condition in Ottawa where the plugs lived on the outskirts of the city to escape high rents.   The car fare
was reduced to 5 cents and building was stimulated,
also tenants flocked out.   The landlord was enabled
to obtain the higher rents.   During the war the car
fare outside the city limits was increased to 10 cts,
making the expense as high as renting in town, so
that rents fell and the street cars are getting what
the landlord loses.    Therefore it is immaterial to
the worker how the surplus is divided up.
The single taxer wants to eliminate the landowner by changing the system of taxation. ' The
worker does not pay the taxes, so why trouble about
them. No matter how they raise the taxes it comes
from the surplus value which is exploited from
labor. When Henry Ford increased his workers'
wages there was such an influx of people seeking
houses the landlord got all the increase. A better
understanding of rent amongst the workers would
have saved a lot of energy expended uselessly during the war period and since, advocating fixed Rent
The Irish Act of 1881 which intended to give a
benefit to the tenants and secure a large share of
the produce of the land, by giving them fixed rents
in specified annual sums of money, was a failure,
because the tenant was bound to deliver a much
larger share of the produce, as the prices of his
produce fell so rapidly that each successive payment
became more oppressive until finally it was impossible and the Irish Acts of 1881, 1885 and 1891
wc are told became fruitful sources of difficulty, to
those for whose benefit they were intended.
The benefits of land reform in New Zealand, and
other reforms there have accrued to the owners of
land and property. The nationalization or municipalization of ground rent, or unearned increment,
cr single tax, is to eliminate the parasitical landlord,
the capitalist having no particular reason for wishing to be burdened with a class of landlords who
obtain a part of the surplus value.
Not only do industrial capitalists pay big rents
themselves to the landlord, but the rent which appears to be paid by the workers, indirectly is paid
by the industrial capitalists.
In concluding these articles, I hope they have
served the purpose intended. That is, to save the
energy of the workers being expended on chasin;r
reform bunk, and to strengthen the movement for
the abolition of the wage system of slavery.
THE END. 1  IftfaftM M m*M '-.'■■■-''■■r' lip   ■■■_■.-,-.■ •
Western Clarion
A Journal of History, Economics, Philosophy,
and Current Events.
Published twice a month by the Socialist Party of
Canada, P. O. Box 710, Vancouver, B. C.
Entered at G. P. 0. as a newspaper.
Editor _ Ewen   MacLeod
Canada, 20 issues     $1.00
Foreign, 16 Issues     *1.00
004 If this number is on your address label your
OO I subscription empires with next issue. Renew
M v ■ promptly.
VANCOUVER, B. ti., DECEMBER 1, 1922. .
"By working 10 hours instead of 8 hours, production
twill be so much Increased that there will be more and
cheaper goods for the German consumer. In other words,
by working 10 hours the German people will reduce the
cost of living while raising the standard of living.
"The time will come when the workers will realize that
by working only 8 hours they can earn enough to keep
alive, whereby working 10 hours they can earn not only
the minimum for existence, but a margin for better living."
—Hugo Stinnes.
HERR Stinnes puts it very nicely: appealing-
ly: with the deep feelings of conviction. He
is almost as anxious as David '' the Wizard''
over the small rights of labor. It is a pity to break
in on a good man's dream. But that is the way of
capital—it cannot permit society to realise its aspirations.
Quite obviously labor is the fountain head of
wealth. It is equally obvious that the more labor—
in production—the more wealth. And if there is
more wealth, there is also a greater available abundance of comfort, and a better potential standard of
living. So the remedy, for want is work ■ for misery,
more work. Why not adopt the simple remedy?
Because the Capitalist class owns the kite and flies
it—as circumstances determine—to suit itself.
The Capitalist class, owning the means of life,
operates them soldly for profit. If the market is
brisk, Capitalist '' prosperity'' prevails; if it is not,
th'e process of competition drives the index of efficiency to a higher level; the standard of living to
keener economics. It is true the expansion of capital is the expansion of'labor. But it is via the world
market. And in opening up the world market for
exploitation, labor is expanded for the same purpose.
But the competitive conditions of production induce
cheap production; cheap production compels more
and greater machinery; more and regulated organisation, and more standardised production. Therefor, although the expansion of Capital involves the
expansion of labor, the reproduction of capital reduces the production of labor. For, the more machinery is in operation, and the more efficiency is developed, the more labor is displaced and the greater
is the amount of production per man; while the more
hours the man can be induced to work, without
physical exhaustion, the moVe profits are realisable
from the surplus values in production. So that the
greater the volume of net production per man per
hour, the cheaper is production as a whole, the wider
is its possible market and the greater the volume of
Since labor-power exchanges equitably in terms
of the market, the cheapening of the cost of production means the cheapening of employment. Consequently the distribution of the wealth produced
increases on the side of the owner and decreases on
the side of the worker. For, although efficiency
methods may maintain—or even raise—the wages of
the necessary labor, they depress the living standards of the general laboring class. And ultimately
they reduce the wages of the actual workers by competitive pressure, thus continually balancing cost
and value. Consequently the relative value of surplus (profit) is constantly augmented to the master
class; the relative value of wages constantly diminished. So that the difference between the 8 and 10
hour day is, to the former an increase in the volume
of cheap production—therefor of trade—therefor
of profit; to the latter a more exhaustive exploitation and a more precarious existence.
There is another side to the picture. The wealth
cf the world is the labor of the world; hence the
market of the world is the producing nations themselves. If giant machinery, by cheapening production gains entry to the possible market simultaneously, by progressively increasing unemployment
:t progressively consumes purchasing power. Prices
may be cheap, but there is a constantly growing
proportion unable to purchase at all. The market
shrinks steadily, production falls, stagnation ensues
on the stimulus of profit, till crises, deeper, darker,
larger, shroud the seething world in misery.
Increased production inevitably means increased
unemplopment. Cheap production means an ebbing
standard of life, not a rising one. .Increasing wealth
signifies a contraction of social prosperity. And the
"margin for- a better living" is no rose-lipped
laughter of happiness, but a fear whose image has
distorted the mind, as its substance has already corrupted the world. If it is impossible for labor to
maintain itself on 8 hours' work, it will be increas-
ingly impossible on 10. If the standard of life declines on the former, it must decline more rapidly
on the latter. If prices fall in the readjustments of
profit-production, social life must grovel in its deeper degradation. And if the capitalist sees nothing
but ruin in the system of 8 hours, the application of
10 hours to the same system can have no other effect
tRan the acceleration of the procession of ruin. So
that the difference between the 8 and 10 hour day
is not merely a difference in the degree of capitalist
"prosperity:" it is witness to a steeper gradient in
thex inclined plane of capitalist dissolution. And
that Herr Stinnes, in common with his industrial
kin, is forced to this reversal of the social forces
of production is evidence that, however stormy the
end is like to be, it cannot be long delayed. R.
(Continued from page 3)
sold. He also expresses the hope that more meetings will be held in the future and encloses a sub.
Vancouver Island shows distinct signs of life
this time. Writing from Victoria. Com. C. Bright
-sends a sub. renewal and a dollar for the Maintenance Fund. An enquiry for books and an order
comes from J. E. Brown, Comberland. He also encloses a sub. renewal and a dollar for the Maintenance Fund.
Com. J. Cartwright sends a brief letter from
Last Wellington with two subs, and enquiries about
two previous ones which he sent in on Oct. 22nd.
We received them alright, but did not include them
in Nov. lst. "Clarion", as the list was already
made up and at the printers. An order for literature comes from Port Alice, also a sub. from Gibson's Landing. A short letter from Com. J. A. McDonald enclosing an order for literature was received. He says the lectures and classes are doing
well, and prospects for the future are good in San
Francisco. The Proletarian Party also send'a renewal of their Clarion bundle subscription from
that city. Subs, from Bakersfield and Los Angclos
were also received. Writing from Cleveland, Ohio.
Com. Swanson organizer for the Proletarian Party
states that they have rented permanent Headquarters in the Labor Temple, and that study classes are
being held. They have been busy all summer on
the street corners, and Charles O'brien spoke at
a meeting on Nov. 18th. The Local meets every
Tuesday evening and any S. P. of C. members visiting Cleveland will be made welcome. The National
Student Forum, Broadway, New York, have sent
in a list of questions to be discussed at their conference on Dec. 26, 27, 20th. Com. E. Anderson,
sends a sub. and greetings from Huntley, New Zealand. This summarizes the correspondence up to
Nov. 11.
Lack of space precludes lengthy comment upon
the correspondence received since the above was
written, but we are gratified to note the earnestness
shown by comrades far afield in advancing the phil
osophy of Socialism among the working class.
From Ottawa, Com.' Wm. Pasch sends a short letter enclosing a sub. renewal and wishing the movement towards education every success; he is sparing no effort in attracting subscribers but says it
is "some job." And we know it. Com. Auddell,
formerly of Ottawa, but now in Montreal, contributes a good letter and two subs. Describing his experiences in Montreal, he says there is a good field
for propaganda. lie addressed four meetings and
literature sales were good. Having the advantage
of a knowledge of both French and English languages, Com. Auddell should be of great use to the
movement in, Montreal, but he is unable to stay
there very long. His future address will be 374
Market St., S. Lawrence, Mass.
Coin. Rose sends a brief note and a sub. from
Winnipeg, and Com. Moore does likewise. A long
letter containing an order for -literature comes
from "Sandy," the live wire of Winnipeg Local.
Writing from Brandon, Com. G. Craig sends a
long letter in which he comments upon McNey's
article on the I. W. W. He is of the opinion that
we know words more by sound than by their real
meaning, „and suggests that a glossary of words
aised by"students, inserted in the "Clarion," would
be of advantage to everybody.
From Youngstown, Alta., Com. Hughes sends
two subs. From Whitla, Com. B. Polinkos sends
lour subs, and a literature order to the amount of
$2.25. Good work! Com. Gus. Albers of Edberg,
and Com. J. Knor of Eckville, Alta., are also doing their bit for the "Clarion." Writing from Han-
na, Alta., Cora. Chas. Lestor says that he has held
two good meetings there, and also three meetings
at Stanmore. Audiences are appreciative, in many
cases having to come a long distance to the meeting
place. Com. Lestor wishes to thank those who are
assisting him on his tour. From Swalwell, Alta.,
Com. G. Beagrie sends a short discriptive letter of
Lestor's meeting in that district. In Swalwell they
are much interested and are asking for more. He
encloses four subs, to the "Clarion." Com. McNeil
writes again from Erskine, Alta., enclosing a sub.
Writing from Eyebrow, Sask., Com. Thos* Foul-
ston sends a sub, renewal and a dollar to the Maintenance Fund. He says that if the weather is favorable when Com. Lestor gets in that district, he
could arrange to hold two or three lectures in
school houses.
From Edgewood, B. C. Com. Shipmaker sends a
short note with a sub. renewal. He says that when
he was an industrial slave, he occasionally had a
dollar to spare, but since he became a stump rancher,
a dollar has become a rare thing to him; he agrees
with the doctor "that while there's life there's
hope." Com. F. Harman sends word from Victoria
that they are making an effort to get a History
Class going, but the attendance is very small so far.
Com. J. Hubble is with them just now, but his
health is still very poor.
Com. N. MacAulay writes from San Francisco,
enclosing a sub. renewal and two dollars for C. M. F.
From Los Angelos, Calif. Com. Ulrich sends four
dollars for the "Clarion," and expresses the hope,
that the Party will be able to publish in pamphlet
form thc continuous articles running through the
From New York, Com. J. F. Maguire sends greetings to W. A. P. and enquires for Frank Cassidy's
address. He is glad to know that we are still holding Sunday propaganda meetings, something they
(cannot do in New York, also says the movement
there is still chaotic. Sends two dollars for Maintenance Fund. From Des Moines, Iowa, comes a
lengthy letter from Com. Frank Williams enclosing
three subs, and a dollar for the Maintenance Fund.
He has been in Des Moines for two months and has
come in contact with the S. P. A. local. He proposes *
to start a study class in history and economics for
the benefit of the younger comrades, and hopes to
be sending in a few subs, to the "Clarion" before
long. Our best wishes go to Com. Williams in the
fine effort he is making in spite of adverse circumstances. This summarizes the correspondence up
to Nov. 25th. »■-•-*"***----- V* ••■■^T^^^i^^^^^n^^
A Brief Review of Current History
STUDENTS of current history, especially in
Europe and the Near East, may be "somewhat
puzzled by the apparent friendly relations now
existing between the representatives of British and
French imperialism on the eve of the Lausanne conference. From 1919 until the signing of the Armistice with the Turks at Mudania, their wonted pose
had always been one of arrogance and disdain.
And until the signing of that Armistice, they had
been more or less constantly fighting each other, by
proxy, in the Near East over such matters as the
distribution of the loot taken from the ruling class
of Turkey. But, according to press dispatches, it
seems that an agreement has been reached which
goes far to bridge the gulf that opened between
them since the conference of Sevres and Versailles.
The anamoly, here stated, may be explained on
the ground that Britain fears to fight a battle lone
handed in the Near East which probably would
cause the collapse of the empire. While France
may perceive the fact that an open and violent
breach of the peace as a result of their divergent
policies, would entail the loss of a money market
so essential for.the practice of war. Such a situation would not only leave France without this vital
factor but it would also discover Britain seriously
affected by the loss of a very important food market. Both countries being equally dependent to a
great extent on the United States for these necessities. And as both owe, jointly, a sum in the neighborhood of eleven billion dollars to the latter country for credits obtained during the past war, it
should be needless for me to pursue the argument
beyond this point—if the reader would only keep in
view the distressed minds of the American financiers
towards debtors in general. Sooner or later these
gentry must tell the simple facts to the very unsophisticated ratepayers of America, that they must
bear the expenses of their adventure in international politics. Or it will suddenly dawn on that large
community of producers that the only ones-to profit by war are the big financiers and a few big industrialists.
That Britain desires peace is quite obvious to
-anyone following the trend of current events, and
this opinion is borne out by the fact that she has
disgorged twenty-five per cent of her oil gains in
the Near East to France, along with a promise of
support in the matter of German reparations. The
fact that she desires peace does not imply that it
springs from a contrite heart doing penance for
past sins, but rather from a fear of the storm that
may sweep away her financial interests in foreign
possessions. The loss of these would affect the
prestige of the empire builders in every corner of
the world market, and though support to France
may ultimately lead to French possession of the
.Ruhr and control over the dye industry of Germany,
-thus jeopardising thc steel and Avooleu industries
of Britain, as well as her coal trade, nevertheless
the loss is small compared with what would result
if the entire forces of the Mohammedan world were
arrayed against her in a war which she would have
to fight single-handed. Nor would it be to the material advantage of either 'France or the United
States, unless pushed by dire necessity, to allow
Britain to bear the brunt of such a fight, as in the
end the consequences of such Avould react upon
themselves. The downfall of the British empire
would shake the*<vvorld of capitalism even more than
the collapse of the Austria-Hungarian dynasty and
the institutions surrounding it. Some notion of
this has arisen in the minds of the more responsible
heads of the separate States.
The world of 1922 is altogether different from
of 1914; everywhere tremendous changes have taken place affecting all classes and institutions, political and social.   E"*£nts in Russia have affected the
By Robert Kirk.
people of«-adjacent countries, and nowhere any more
so than among the people of the East, ln some
parts like India an entire change in the industrial
character of the country is advocated not only by
the workers but also among the more intellectual
members of the country. Among these, representatives of all castes, feelings of dissatisfaction with
general conditions, which have resulted from large
scale production and foreign monopolies is evident
throughout this great community. The Ghandi
movement , the most articulate expression of this
dissatisfaction still continues to enlist support and
sympathy from scores of thousands of the native
population. Nor has British rule in its many-sided
aspects been such that it has escaped the destructive
criticism of the most able of the Ghandi propagandists. The virility and earnestness of their purpose
can only be disguised from the general public by
the most discreet of censorships that holds back the
news that many thousands are arrested daily. And
every measure adopted by the representatives of the
British ruling class in India has in no wise affected
the strength of the movement but rather... tends to
lend stimulus to it.
Not only is India affected by traditional methods
of politicians opplied to economic problems of recent origin, but the same condition is found among
the people of the Near East, intensified if anything
by more irritating circumstances. The statesmen
of the.western capitalist class were responsible for
this condition when they, with great conceit" in their
abilities as peacemakers, decided to change the map
of Turkey as they had changed the map of Europe.
This started a revolution in the administrative form
of the State. The old Sultan Khalif, head of the
Church and State, was deposed, the parasitical
swarm that kept Turkey in pawn to British, French
and Greek financiers, were swept from office, and
the National Assembly, bearing close resemblance
to the Soviet form of administration, was set up at
Angora. One correspondent writing from Constantinople of the "Manchester Guardian," has this to
The Grand National Assembly is a purely secular body.
The Nationalist army fought ior the political and territorial restoration of Turkey, not for Islamic expansion.
It was a national, not a holy war.
*       *       *
The problem is not confined to Turkey, the whole Islamic world is torn by nationalist as distinct from religious movements.
These changes could not have been wrought
without the -whole-hearted support of the workers
and peasants, who naturally are as much affected
by the spread of social ideas, and the quickening
of a class-consciousness, as are the workers of the
West. And the leaders of the Nationalists are much
more radical than the leaders of the Young Turk
movement a generation past. All of this goes to
show that the British and French representatives at
Lausanne will meet a different type of Turk from
that which faced their predecessors on numerous
occasions prior to 1914. And one most likely to
stand by his demand for a restored Turkey on the
lines which marked the map of 1913.
Here, then is a pretty kettle of fish. The return,
for instance of Mosul, Thrace and Constantinople,
three places which appear in Turkish demands,
means disappointment for American, British,
French and Greek interests. Mosul being the
rich oil district out of which Britain promised
America and France twenty-five per cent each of
the shares, and in Thrace, Greece loses a fertile
country for the growing of grains, while sharing at
the same time in the loss of Constantinople as an international port, a loss which would be borne in
part of the British and the-French. Should the
claims of the Turkish nationalists be conceded at
Lausanne, they would be followed by immediate reactions: the losers asking for other compensations.
It Avas characteristic, however, of British diplomacy
to enlist the support of American and French oil interests by sharing a much coveted place between
them, but it remains to be seen how they will act in
face of Turkish opposition. Nor is the strength of
this opposition easily measured by the forces under
Kemal, for much further back and away frpm Turkey itself are forces that lend strength lo the Angora government.
it may be found in Germany who still pays for
her "crime against society," and the payment is
shared in by her equally guilty accusers. She produces commodities to pay reparations and among
her former customers the most absurd tariffs arc
used to keep these goods off the markets. She needs
gold to meet many of her payments and she must
purchase these, from her customers at the rate of
1,500 marks for a dollar. She must have the gold,
her credit having gone, and the number of suckers
biting today is less than formerly. And still
people wonder why trade is dead.
And Turkey may find assistance in Russia, whose
efforts to resume trading relations with the rest of
the world has been frustrated by politics everywhere. A country requiring enough to keep many .
countries busy for years to come, whose resources
to pay are beyond dispute. Despite which, howeVer,
famine still stalks the land, blighting the hopes of
the people, rendering them inert and senseless. A
condition which the world is paying for just as sure
as summer's sun extracts its tribute from the sea.
Here then are forces, not to mention the Arabs and
the Egyptians who may support the Grand National
Assembly of Turkey in its demands from Britain,
France and Greece. Aud for such a proposition as
this the master class send politicians; whose method-i
belong to the centuries that are past, whose interests are more evenly divided between serving themselves and their paymasters, than it is between the
trading class and the producers, who in the end
are the ones who pay for all. 'Tis strange that while
the master has at his command those who could render him a service of a lasting kind yet he is blind.
Touchstone was right: "It's a mad world."
OUR financial pulse is rising. We are very
nearly pleased with the totals as per thi;
issue and last. The people who are keen on
fine distinctions, however, will agree that you car.
Le pleased although not satisfied. But it seems tha.
the less encouragement we indite, the more encou.-
agment Ave receive—Here and Noav. So vve'11 hob!
cur peace, in great expectation of the figures to
come.   Observe the present muster:—
Following $1 each: .]. Olson, F. Warder, F. E
Moore, E. E. Cole, W. R. Miller, T. Faulston, D. R.
McLean, A. A. McNeill, II. Maitland, Gus Alber;.
T. Moore, K. II. Machlin, Win. Pasch, J. F. Knon
J. Pryde, J. Johnstone, 0. Craig, C. Lestor, A. V.
Lawrence, Tom Dorrill. (i. I). McKenzie, Will Bay-
liss, J. E. Palmer. R. W. Iiatley, Ceo. Kennedy
(per .1. Mitchell), Tom O'Conner.
Following $2 each: J. V. Hull, Geo. Aspdcn, E.
T. Hughes, P. W'. Bishop, G. Donaldson, Dr. W. .1
Curry, II. Schwartz, G. W. Lohr.
L. Audell $1.50; W. Shipmaker $150; G. R. Ron-
eld $1.20; G. R. Randall 60 cents; Jim Cartwrigh
$3; Frank Williams .+3; G. Beagrie $4; B. E. Pol-
inkos $4. G. Alley $4; W. A. Pritchard $10.50.
Above, Clarion subscriptions received from 15th
to 30th Nov., inclusive, total $75.30.
FolloAving $1 each: Frank Cusack; T. Faulston
Gus Albers; Frank Williams; A. Lieu; Will Bayliss
Geo. Kennedy (per J. Mitchell); J. G. Randall.
G. R, Ronald, 30 cents: J. E. Palmer, $2.05; Dr
W. J. Curry, $3; "C. K.;" $10.00.
Above. C. M. F. receipts from 15th to 30th Nov..
inclusive total $23.35. PAGE SI&
Soviet Russia, from the S. P. of C. Viewpoint
Socialist Party Attitude Towards Soviet Russia.
AT this point  the  Manifesto  essays  to  treat
specifically on the  attitude  of the  Socialist
Party of Canada towards Soviet Russia and
its administration.
The Russian revolution contained, for the producing masses of today, significant features, in degree if not in kind, unprecedented in the history
of civilization. On a great national scale, the producing masses of Russia, both agrarian and industrial toAvn Avorkers, successfully united to seize control of the state. Czarism and the short-lived Ker-
ensky government cleared out of the way, the new
executive Avent to office on a clear mandate for the
abolition of parasitism (parasitic landlordism and
parasitic capitalism), the means of production to be
operated for the benefit of the country as a Avhole.
By reason of that mandate the Socialist Party of
Canada, being a party of the revolutionary Avorking
class, has more than a student's interest in Russia
as the scene of a social experiment: elassi-conscious-
ness and feelings of comradeship in the Avorld Avide
class struggle, enlist the party members with the
producing masses of Russia. And so, in spite of
Iioav far short of realisation that mandate may be,
and no matter Iioav ill-conceived or ill-executed thc
means to its realization, the Party recognises the
mandate as a call for unstinted loyalty from the
Avorkers of the rest of the Avorld to those of Soviet
Russia and to their executives. •
But loyalty to those wielding power in Russia
and to the people of Russia does not entail
concurrence in what may seem to us suicidal
policies. There exists a bad tendency to resign freedom of thought and action throughout the Avorking
class movement in all parts of the world, into the
hands of external authority. To any- such sovereignty the Party can not submit and holds to the
exercise of a free intelligence as its prerogative. In
its estimation, the other way spells stagnation in
ideas and rot and decay in the movement. As some
one has Avisely said: "HoAA'ever we may long to escape from the strain of perplexity and thinking incidental to the social problem by resigning it to
external authority, the proposal to do so is a shortcut solution which "will never get rid of the conflict
and problem." And, in any case, it is certain that
loyalty both to those in Russia and to the Avorking
class movement at large, far from entailing surrender of our discriminating and discretionary poAvers,
on the contrary, compels their active participation
in its cause.
In that spirit of loyalty the Party discussions, on
the platform and in. its official organ the "Western
Clarion," as to Russian affairs have been carried on.
Furthermore, it., has ahvays been kept in mind, in
dealing with those affairs, that the Soviet regime
inherited social havoc in Russia from Czarism, while,
in foreign countries, fate'is decrees fell athwart
revolutionary hopes everywhere in the failure of
their Avorking classes to render adequate support to
the new Russia. >3o that, in addition to the all-sufficient task of economic and social reconstruction,
that country was harassed by foreign imperialistic
interventions, the fomenting of domestic counterrevolutions, financed and munitioned by the Allied
governments. In addition, these "civilizers" established for years an economic blockade so effective
that not even medical comforts could be got through
it, though the people of Russia Avere being decimated
by typhus and tbe black death—pestilential legacies of the war and years of malnutrition.
Largely because of the failure of the international Avorking class to adequately support Russia
Avhen that country Avas leaving behind the old social
landmarks and beaten paths and venturing into the
uncharted future, the years since the revolution have
been years of bitter travail for its peoples; and for
the administration, its course has been set amidst
mountainous troubles. As to why the Avorking
masses of other lands failed to respond to Russia's
need, the S. P. of C. holds that it Avas because they
were yet too deeply steeped in old social loyalties;
they yet lacked the knowledge that emancipates the
mind from the deadening hand of the past; they yet
lacked that vision that comes with class-consciousness and Which! Avould have enabled them to see that
the fight of Russia's producing classes for emancipation from social parasitism Avas their fight also,
Ergo: One such experience should suffice. Educate !
The Process of Revolutionary Change.
To those discouraged at Avhat may appear to
them as the sIoav progress or even failure of the
social revolution in Russia, it may be said that even
Hinder the most favorable circumstances there has
ahvays been conceived of a more or less protracted
transition period whose line of progress would be
experimental and evolutionary. Technical facts, it
has seemed, would mainly determine what industries
would be operated communally or individually.
Such industry as remains small-scale in character on
a par with peasant farming, may never be communally operated, though, in some indirect Avay, social
control in the interest of the community Avould be
The small individual producer supplies a social
need, and only an advance in the state of the industrial arts may in some degree eliminate him. In
some countries, as he is in Russia (and perhaps in
Canada), he is a majority of the population, and in
others, so considerable a minority as to be reckoned
with. It is certain, that the revolutionary future
must be worked out by a coalition of all classes of
producers against ^economic exploitation. The following distinction drawn between tAvo kinds of
property may illustrate the principle on which the
wage Avorker, and the small individual producer
owning his own means of production, may act together for that purpose.
OAvnership, as in peasant proprietorship, when
the OAvner is also "user" of the productive property, is not capitalist OAvnership. The owner in
this case is producing for a livelihood.
When the owner of productive property is an
absentee-owner (or to the extent that he is not the
Avholc,"user" of it) and employs other people to
use the property productively, and out of the proceeds of industry derives a profit by mere right of
ownership, that is capitalist ownership, It is a case
of production for profit. The owner is an exploiter
of labor.
The characteristic features of the capitalist
method of production, are largei-scale production entailing large capital investments—operation by the
co-operative labor of many wage-workers—production for profit. History sIioavs the capitalist method
of production as growing up out of the handicraft
method of medieval times, which Avas—small-scale
individual production—owner of productive property, also the user—its nature Avas, production for
a livelihood.
Today, both the propertyless wage-worker and
the small individual "owner-producer" are exploited under the capitalist system: The wage-
worker, directly, by means of the wages system, and
the small "Owner-producer," indirectly, through
the market in the thousand ways of control over economic, processes and the institution of credit exercised by the vested interests of capital by means
of its prescriptive, legal rights and privileges, to
something for nothing.
During the handicraft period, the habitual condition in that sphere of social life Avas that "owner" and "user" Were one and the same person. The
idea that an "owner" had a natural and inviolable
light to his means of production and the products
that were the issue thereof, conformed to the prevailing industrial situation. The idea Avas the "commons-sense" of the time and became incorporated as
a foundation principle into the body of legal theory
known as the "system of natural rights" Avhich lies
at the basis of modern jurisprudence covering property and contractual relations. That system of
"rights" first received systematic elaboration at
the hands of 18th century legalists and moral phil
osophers. But even at the time this legal theory,
enactment and practice, together with the appropriate moralities Avere being elaborated, the condition
of "oAvner-user" as one and the same person had
already passed aAvay as the dominant, characteristic fact in the industrial situation. An advance in
the industrial arts had come on. Large-scale production requiring the co-operative labor of many
workers had become prevalent, and involved each
enterprise in capital investments too large for any
one "individual to encompass out of the proceeds of
a life-time of his own personal labor.
To meet this change in the state of the industrial
arts, the surplus capital Avas necessary of the wealthier merchant and trading class, Avho Avere rising to
prominence in economic and social status consequent
on the constant increase of products for exchange,
and the opening up of a Avorld market, Under the
attraction of large profits to be obtained in large-
scale production, this surplus capital of the merchant and trading class Avas finding its Avay more
and more into industrial enterprises. "OAvner" and
"user" of productive property were fast becoming no longer one and the same, person; could not
be. The "owner" had become the capitalist employer and the "users"" had become Avage Avorkers.
OAvner-users Avere being eliminated, the users being
separated from ownership in the means of Avealth
production by the competition of large-scale industry and thus forced, in order to live, to sell their
labor power for wages to the large capitalist owners of productive property.
That process of separating usership from ownership, resulting in the formation of a class of oAvn-
ers of productive property ..who performed no industrial function, and of another class of industrial
producers Avho Avere Avithout OAvnership in the means
of production, has continued progressively doAvn to
this day. But legal theory and practice and the
dominant moralities still guarantee to OAvnership
the right to the usufruct of industry by mere
"right" of ownership; usership being no longer
thought a necessary conjunction with OAvnership in
the common-sense of the orthodox kind. The old
common-sense of the handicraft period is, however,
gaining headway again, though not yet incorporated
in laAv and custom, domains least responsive to the
forces of social change. As an offset to it, a legal
"fiction" or metaphysical "make-believe" has been
conceived for the laAv and orthodox moralities, that
"Capital" is a productive factor and so is entitled
to its share of industry as Avell as labor.
Thus it is that Ave are all made equal in the eyes
of a system of laAV that recognizes no economic disabilities brought on by a change in the state of the
industrial arts. A phrase has set us free; great are
our modern practitioners of magic! Has not Anatole
France bitterly said: "The majestic equality of the
laAV forbids the millionaire as Avell as the penniless
outcast to sleep out under bridges at night?" In
the present order of society the economic institutions are capitalistic, and so long as the capitalist
class remain economically, politically and socially
dominant, the function of law is to maintain and
prosper those institutions, as such, and the function
of the moralists to justify them. "The laAV is a projection in idea of the de facto authority of the community, and this authority has its ultimate root and
sanction in the status, poAver, and preferences of the
ruling class in the community. On the: whole, by
and large, it is for this class that the moralists
speak." (H. M. Kallen, in the ";New Republic,"
May, 24,1922.)
In conclusion, under this heading, Ave can say
to the Avage-worker of large industry and to the individual OAvner-producer, that in its broad and fundamental aspect the mandate of the social revolution is for the abolition of capitalist class OAvnership
in the means of Avealth production of society. And
that, instead of the mere title of OAvnership constituting a claim on an increment from industry, the
principle to be established is, that the right to hold
land and natural resources, or to share in the pro- WESTERN   CLARION
ducts of industry, must be based on personal labor
in producing goods and services.
But there are no ready-made plans for the future. Far better, indeed, it is to keep a free intelligence to Avork out that future. As Bernard ShaAv
has said: "The socialist future is not a house of
refuge for the decrepit and old, but a great adventure."
On the Effort to Re-establish Foreign Relations.
To return to the Russian question. The efforts
of the Soviet administration to re-establish economic
and political relations with foreign capitalist nations
has been watched Avith some anxiety and even disapproval by many revolutionists. Nevertheless, for
economic reasons alone, vital to the life of Russia,
such efforts were inevitable. No people can exist
as a hermit nation once they have advanced beyond
the primitive Avants and self-sufficient productive
economy of the fragmentary communities of barbarism. History records many instances of civilized
peoples Avho have fallen back to more primitive
states, and some Avho even failed to stay a retrograde movement to extinction, but all have gone
back involuntarily and catastrophically. If social
revolutions appeared on order, then we might have
them in all countries at once, tbais artfully simplifying the problem of social change. They are, however, the outcome of necessary conditions in time
and place, and no pre-vision can tell when and
where and Iioav, except Avithin very broad limits,
so complex and obscure are the factors engaged.
With Russia, for instance, a linked series of unforeseeable factors, and a sudden conjuncture of circumstances forced a long, oppressive, and tyrannical authority and all its machinery of administration
to collapse amid the hatred of all classes, through its
rottenness and incompetency to deal With an unprecedented situation." So Russia Avas forced to the
forefront of revolutionary change.
■ The folloAving reasons appear valid as to why
Russia, as Avith any other country in AA'hich. a revolutionary movement may attain poAver, must continue to maintain economic and political relations
with the rest of the Avorld.
The civilized peoples of today have long drifted
or evolved aAvay from an all-round, complete, self-
nipporting economy. From primitive times on, the
principle of subdivision of labor has been one of tbe
most fruitful factors in developing the industrial
arts, as well as furthering other of life's activities.
In the industrial arts of modern times, under the
capitalist method of production, that principle has
become effective on an international scale to a degree unknown before.
The competition on the AA'orld's market, and the
additional factor of the machine process entailing
quantity production, have forced modern nations to
specialize in producing those lines of commodities
in which they can surpass or hold their OAvn against
their competitors. Each nation has noAv become dependent on other nations for raw materials of industry, and for those commodities in which the competition of foreign products has stifled domestic enterprise, or which the country is incapable of producing itself by reason of unsuitability of climate,
soils, etc. Not alone are the nations devoid of the
material means of a complete self-supporting economy, but, what is vastly more vital, their populations have lost the skill and knoAvledge of the industrial arts, together with the primitive Avants and
desires and habits of life and thought that are necessary to make life endurable in such an economy.
In short, the patriotically conceived national entities, sovereign states, insensate jostling rivals for
nature's stored up resources and for the gateAvays,
highAvays and marts of trade and commerce, are but
interdependent economic units, special parts of a
world, economy.
The mechanism of this modern Avorld economy
is a delicately balanced affair, and the continued
well-being of any single country rests on a precarious foundation. Its maintenance depends on an unbroken continuity of imports from foreign countries,
in exchange for Avhich domestic products must be
exported. In such a situation it is obvious that the
primal responsibility resting on a ■revolutionary
administration is to safeguard the economic life of
its people by keeping up contact with foreign markets for her surplus products and for sources of supplies for her OAvn needs. It should be needless to
say that commercial relations with foreign countries
entail political relations Avith their governments.
In short, in the respect of Russia's necessities it may
be taken as axiomatic that suicide is not a revolutionary act. The thought of Russia as a hermit
nation is intolerable. That way spells a stagnant
society incapable of contributing anything to, or
receiving anything from the progressive stream of
industrial and cultural life of the great world. It
is, in fact, to Russia's interest and to the interest of
the social revolution in the world at large that she
enter, if need be by force, on to the busy streets of
international life.
As to Soviet Mistakes.
The Soviet administration has made mistakes,
some that they must be held in part responsible for
and others that were only discoverable in the light
of after-events. But then, all human activity is experimental in the sense that all the factors in a
problem are never known. In Russian affairs the
element of time has been a fateful factor. Crucial
problems crowded thick and fast upon the administration and demanded instant action. Measures
had to be thought out and put into operation with a
single eye to immediate situations which the quick
stepping of events often rendered inoperative in
short time. In some such cases the administration
has been unduly reproached for lack of foresight as,
for instance, in the so-called extremist policies of
the first years of the regime—the communalization
of factory production, the abolition of free trading and the centralization of the state poAvers.
Yet it is the testimony of impartial and trained
investigators Avho Avere in Russia at the time that
those extremist policies Avere the only practical ones
in the chaotic state of Russia. Further, they testify
that the Communists Avere the only group with the
energy and mental grasp of Russia's problems together with tbe confidence of tlie masses in their
possession necessary to deal Avith it. Amongst those
so testifying, it may be sufficient to name three, no
one of Avhom subscribes to Communist-theory—Arthur Ransome and Professor Goode of the "Manchester Guardian," and Colonel Raymond Robins
of the American Red Cross, Avhose writings and lectures on Soviet Russia since 1917 have had world-
Avide publicity.
The folloAving reflections, extracted in summary
fashion from the philosophizing of a thinker of
note of our day, in which due respect is paid to the
part played by luck or fate in the life of man, seem
here to be pertinent and to offer a rational perspective on the administrative activities of the Soviet
"It may be said, that it is ahvays the part of
Avisdom not to neglect present needs, for after all, in
so far as the future is an effect of the present, the
present constitutes our only control of the future.
As for the rest—the rest is luck, the pure contingency of a world which Avas not made for us and
does not care for us. a World of cosmic forces indifferent to the scheme oil man or his welfare. If
Ave have freedom in this world, avc have it in just
that degree that, knowing tbe facts, wc are enabled
to master them; to over-rule their coercion and vary
our plans; to influence events by the poAver of our
desire and choice. The ways of freedom are thus,
activities of intelligence. Knowledge of the present and the tendencies of things, i.e. their future
meanings, is essential in so far as Ave may predetermine the future within the limits set by fate.
The present is what Ave work on; the future is what
avc Avork out."
And so. Avith that, the exposition of our Socialist perspective closes. In the opening remarks it
Avas assumed that, the faults of judgment in regard
to Russian affairs Avere, in the main, due to faults
of perspective. We have labored to correct those
faults.   May Ave be justified!
We have confiedence in the revolutionary integrity of the Soviet administration. The greatest
dangers menacing that administration have not boon
internal ones but external—the menace of hostile
foreign interests. These, we think, will continue
to be the source of its greatest dangers. Therefore,
it follows that the greatest service we can render
Soviet Russia is to make Socialists here, in Canada—
Let us, then, turn to our Avork of implanting in
the minds of the Avorking masses the vision and intention for the new social order. To do that, we
must supplant knoAvledge for ignorance, pride for
humility and a disciplined Avill for blind emotion.
Moral: "The present is what Ave Avork on—as for
the rest, it is fate!" "Sufficient for the day is the
evil thereof!"
Erratum: In the first part of the Manifesto, published in our last issue, there appears a misplaced
line. See (in that issue) page 3, column 3, last sentence of second paragraph from the top, Avhich
should read: In fact, being the root cause of the distresses, those institutions themselves obstucted relief.
Editor's Note.—The Manifesto, written by Comrade C.
Stephenson, has the endorsation of the D.E.C. It will be
seen that its viewpoint expresses a continuity of the Party
attitude outlined in the "Western Clarion" continuously
since 1918, in the "Red Flag" and "Indicator," and in the
S. P. of C. Manifesto, Preface to Fifth Edition, 1920.
THERE are so many straws that show which
way the economic, or shall Ave say "trade
Avinds," are bloAving that they can hardly be
The sudden cessation of the peace barrage behind
which the dominant nations prepared to put their
fighting machines on an up-to-date, scientific basis,
by scrapping a few superfluous ships which had
proved too cumbersome for practical use and saving
their expensive up-keep to reinvest later in modem
means of warfare; a proceeding which certainly
entitles the U. S. administration to its claim of being
ii business administration, and of which it made the
most iu the recent election, is perhaps the most noticeable straw. For the Washington Conference
held the middle of the stage Avhile it lasted.
The breaking up of old parties here and the
formation of new alignments abroad under Avhich
to keep up the imperialistic game are also receiving
the best efforts of the Avorld's politicians. The
notification of British labor that they Avould not
support another Avar and the downfall of the Lloyd
George government, which Avas an encouragement
to French cockiness, the announcement by Bonar
Law that the same policy in the Near East Avould
be pursued and which took the cock out of French
cockiness and which has sent the Tiger of [France
speeding AvestAvard to whisper into the ear of Uncle
Sam the advisability of liquidating the French debt
in oil, Avhich Avill come in handy to lubricate the
machinery of a re-constructed merchant marine and
which can be had in abundance at the expense of
their erstwhile allies if he will but sustain her in her
Near Eastern policies.
The calling of a special session of Congress for
tlie purpose of crowding through the Ship Subsidy
Bill, while the crowding is good, in order to take
care of the growing South American trade which
was the spoils Avon by ihe (J. S. for participafion in
Ihe late war.
The Armistice Day speech of Mr. Harding, casting at least a shadoAV of coming eArents and helping
to create a psychology with which to pave the Avay
for those events, together with the sudden demand
by Wall Street that the bars to future immigration
be let doAvn almost immediately after they Avere erected. All these are straws Avhich sIioav how easterly
the winds are blowing.
The Avatching, waiting policy of Uncle Sam until
such time as the weakened position of the European
powers Avill enable him to come to their assistance
with the best advantage to himself, and having
gained the indisputed hegemony of the Western
Continent he can Avell afford to turn his face eastward, for is there not there, not a neAv, but an old
world to conquer?'
The   Origin  Of  the   World     Literature_Price List
By R. McMillan.
Once upon a time 1 heard a story, from the Arabic, which interested me very greatly. It Avas the
story of a garden in the Persian country. The rose
said to the lily: "I think that our gardener is a very
wonderful man." "Yes," replied the lily, "I quite
agree with you. What a long time he lives, and he
never changes!" "That i.s a curious Jiing about
him," said the rose; and here her voice sank to a
mysterious whisper as she added: "I think he lives
for ever, because the rose that died soon after I was
born, an old rose, said that he was just the same
Ay hen she Avas born." The lily bowed her gentle
head, and replied: "Yes I think he lives for ever."
You see, little girl, it all depends on the point
of vieAv. To the roses in the garden, the'man Avho
looked after them appeared to be immortal, simply
because their lives were so very short. So the
mountains appear to us to be everlasting, because
Ave live such a little Avhile. And the Avorld appears
to us like the gardener—to live for ever. But nothing lives for ever! All things pass—worlds, suns,
systems—everything has its day, and then fades
aAvay. ^Nothing vanishes, as far as Ave know; but
everything changes its shape." We cannot think of
veal things going to nothing, any more than Ave can
think of something coming from nothing. This
may seem to be an out-of-thel-way subject, yet it all
belongs to the question of the origin of the Avorld.
Such a lot of things belong to it! Everything belongs to it, I. think.
You have never been to England, have you?
Perhaps you will go some day. When you get to
London, you will find there the mightiest city in
the world, Avith nearly tAvice as many people in it
as there are in the whole of Australia. And yet
history goes back to the time Avhen London Avas only
a village, by a great river, with a feAV poor fishermen
on its banks. Two thousand year ago there Avas no
London at all, for Avhen the Romans Avere in England they did not seem to think that the bank of
the Thames Avas a great place; nor did the people
Avho came after them realize for a long time hoAv important the river was. When the kings Avere first
eroAvned in England they Avere croAvned at Winchester. London is quite modern, but when ybu
drive through it on the top of a 'bus it seems to
have always been. Nothing has ahvays been!
Nothing endures in the Avhole Avide Avorld. Everything fades and fails in ail the. Avide universe, even
men. A great poet once Avrote:—
For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts;
Even one thing befalleth them;
As the one dieth, so dieth the other;
Yea, they have all one breath;
So that a man hath no pre-eminence above a beast;
For all is vanity.
All go unto one place;
All are of the dust,
And all turn to dust again.
There are many people who think this is not
true, but I never argue with a poet, You will find
these lines in the Bible, an old md noble book, with
Aihich feAV people appear to be acquainted.
What I Avant you to understand is that London
Avas not ahvays the same as it is uoav. I think you
understand thai, do you not? But the climate used*,
to be different also. When you hear a man say,
"I think the seasons are changing; they are nothing
like what they were when I Avas a boy,".you can
afford to smile to yourself. But be sure that you
do it to yourself. The seasons never change iu the
lifetime of a man. The seasons change only in millions of years. It Avas colder in London 240,000
years ago than it is noAv. You may, indeed, take it
as a fact that the climate of London has been different several times. Let me tell you a curious thing,
on the authority of EdAvard Clodd. When they were
digging for the foundation of Drummond's neAv
bank, at Charm? Cross, in London, a feAV years ago,
they found some strange bones. Avhich Avere identified as those of the Cave Lion, a long extinct beast;
the tusks and bones of tho mammoth, or AVoolly-
haired elephant, the bones of the Irish deer, the
rhinoceros, extinct oxen, red deer, etc. How. had
they come where they were ? Think cf a bold .rhinoceros roaming about where London is noAV! Think
of a Avoolly-haired elephant there, too!
It seems to me to be quite impossible till I remember the changes that the Avorld has seen. I think
you understand that the climate of the Coal Age
must have been hot and steamy. Well, coal Avas
formed near to the place we hoav call the South
Pole. Professor David and all his merry men, Avhen
they Avent Avith the Shackleton expedition, found
it hidden under the ice and snow of the Antartic
world. There must have been a time Avhen the
Aveather Avas hot at the Poles. How long since? I
do not know. Nobody knoAvs; but, anyAvay, years
Avould be of no value to measure with in such a case.
We are in the position of the rose and the lily: our
lives are so short that we cannot realize these tremendous stretches of time.
But where Avere men all this time? There Avere
men of a sort, even when the Avoolly elephant Avas
living in London. But they Avere of a very poor
type. I have some pictures of the skulls of the very
early men; but they are quite different from those
of thc Greeks, or from our OAvn. The first men Avere
of a very Ioav, bestial type, and yet they were different from the monkeys, or any of the other beasts.
1 feel 1 ought not t» speak for myself here, as the
subject is a deep one, and requires a specialist to
deal with it. The greatest and most honoured specialist, that I knoAv of is Sir E. Ray Lankester, Avho
has been President of the British Association for the
Advancement of Science, Director of the British
Museum, and lots of other things. He Avrote a book
called The Kingdom of Man, Avhieh was really
founded on three addresses he delivered at Oxford
and other places. I Avant to quote his words, whicii
will sIioav you that man is very ancient. He says
-("Nature's Insurgent Son," Chap. VII):—
"The immense antiquity of man Avas established
and accepted on all sides just before Mr. Darwin
published his book on The Origin of Species. The
palaeolithic elements of the river gravels, though
probably made much more than 150,000 years ago,
do not, any more than do the imperfect skulls occasionally found in association with them, indicate a
condition of the human race greatly more monkeylike than is presented by existing savage races. The
implements themselves are manufactured with great
skill and artistic feeling. Within the last ten years
much rougher flint implements, of peculiar types,
have been discovered in gravel which are 500 feet
above the level of the existing rivers. These eoliths
of the south of England indicate a race of men of
less developed skill than the makers of the palaeolithic, and carry the antiquity of man at least as far
back beyond the palaeolfths as these are from the
present day. We have as yet found no remains giving the direct basis for conclusions on the subject;
but, judging by the analogy (not by any means a
conclusive method) furnished by the history of other
large animals noAv living alongside of man—such
as the horse, thc rhinoceros, the tapir, the wolf,
Ihe hyena, nnd the bear—it is not improbable that it
Avas in the remote period knoAvn as the lower
Miocene—remote even as compared Avith the gravels
in Avhich eoliths occur—that Natural Selection began to favour that increase in the size of the brain of
a large and not very powerful semi-erect ape, which
eventuated, after some hundreds of thousands of
years, in «the breeding-out of a being Avith a relatively enormous brain-case, a skilful hand, and an
inveterate tendency to throw stones, flourish sticks,
protect himself in caves, and in general to defeat
aggression, and satisfy his natural appetites by the
use of his wits, rather than by strength alone, in
Avhich, however, he was not deficient."
Next Lesson:
Cloth Bound Per Copy
Positive Outcome of Philosophy  $1.85
A. B. C. of Evolution (McCabe)  $1.16
Economic Determinism <.  $1.65
Evolution of the Idea of God (Grant Allen .|1.1B
Darwinism and Race Progress (Haycraft)  $1.16
Evolution of Property (Lafargue)  $1.16
Critique of Political Economy  $1-65
Revolution and Counter Revolution (Marx) $1.16
History of Paris Commune (Lissagaray)  $1.60
Ancient Society   $1.85
Philosophical Essays  \  $1.65
Theoretical System of Karl Marx  $l.P-6
Landmarks of Scientific Socialism   $1.66
Socialism and Philosophy  $1.65
Essays on the Materialistic Conception of History.... $1.65
Capitalist Production (First Nine and 32nd Chapters
"Capital," vol. 1, (Marx)  $1.00
Savage Survivals (Moore) $1.00
Vital Problems in Social Evolution   80c
Science and Revolution  ;  80c
The Militant Proletariat   80c
Evolution Social and Organic   80c
Puritanism  80c
Ethics and History  80c
Germs of Mind in Plants   80c
The Triumph of Life   80«
Anarchism and Socialism  :  80c
Feuerback ^  80c
Socialism Positive and Negative   80c
The American Empire  (Nearing)  60o
Eighteenth Brumaire   80c
The End of the World '. .....  80c
Science and Superstition  80c
Paper Covers Per Copy
Two Essays on History (C. Stephenson and G. Deville)    5e
Independent Working Class Education  1 10c
Communist Manifesto  - 10e
Wage-Labor and Capital  :.' lOo
The Present Economic System (Prof. W. A. Bonger) „..10o
Socialism. Utopian and Scientific  15o
Slave of the Farm : „...10c
Manifesto, S. F. of C lOe
Evolution of Man (Prof. Bolsche)  JOo
Causes of Belief ln God (Lafargue)  - 10«
Shopv Talks on Economics (Marcy)  16o
The State and Revolution (Lenin)  25c
Value, Price and Profit (Marx)  16o
Economic Causes of War (Leckie) T.26e
The Protection of Labor in Soviet Russia (Kaplun) 15«
Civil War in France (Marx)  86c
Eighteenth Brumaire (Marx)  . 85o
Christianism and Communism (Bishop W. M. Brown)....25«i
A Worker Looks at History (Starr) 80c
Psychology  of  Marxian  Socialism  30c
W. A. Pritchard's Address to the Jury, (State Trials,
Winnipeg, Man., FaJl Assizes 1919-20)  25c
Quantity Rates on Paper Covered Pamphlet*.
Two Essays on History  25 copies 76e
Communist Manifesto  25 copies $2.00
Wage-Labor and Capital  25 copies $2.00
Present Economic System  25 copies $1.60
Socialism, Utopian and Scientific  25 copies $3.26
Slave of the Farm  25 copies $1.50
Manifesto of S. P. of C 25 copies $2.00
Evolution of Man  25 copies $8.75
Causes of Belief in God   25 copies $2.00
Value, Price and Profit 25 copies $8.26
Economic Causes of War 10 copies $2.00
rhrlstianism and Communism   6 oopies $1.00
Psychology of Marxian Socialism 10 copies $2.50
W. A. Pritchard's Address to the Jury (State Trials,
Winnipeg, Man., Fall Assizes 1919-20)....10 copies $2.00
All prices include Postage.
Make all moneys payable to E. McLeod, P. O. Box
710, Vancouver, B. C.   Add discount on cheques.
Alii above literature can be obtained from J. M.
Sanderson, Box 2354, Winnipeg, Manitoba.
Socialist Party of Canada
STAR THEATRE, 300 Block, Main Street
Speaker: SID. EARP.
•   All meetings at 8 p.m.
Questions. Discussion.


Citation Scheme:


Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics



Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            async >
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:


Related Items