densely populated, it is reasonable to suppose, that all was in common among them, and that every one took from the public stock, to his own use, such things as his immediate necessities required Thus, the land was in common, and no part of it was the permanent property of any man in particular; yet, whoever was in possession or occupation of any determinate spot of it, acquired, for the time, a sort of ownership, from which it would have been unjust, and contrary to the law of nature, to have driven him away by force; but, when he quitted the use or occupation of it, another might take possession of it, without injustice to any one."

Here, then, we pause to inquire, why did not our original law-makers follow out this simple, natural principle, so easily to have been accomplished, so just and natural in itself, by making a law something like this: That the fact of a man having property on any part of the land that he had not taken forcible possession of, or had improved it, in any manner, by the labor of his hands, should give him an indisputable title to its possession, just so long as he chose to occupy it, and no longer, always preserving a distinction between the land itself, and the property upon it; it also being made the duty of government to protect and secure every man in this most sacred, just, natural and unalienable right? Had they done this, what rivers of blood, what oceans of tears, and ages of misery, had been saved the human race! Why did they abandon this just and sacred equitable code of laws, and give us, in its stead, those "paradoxical and unnatural institutions," which, Mr. Blackstone says, are based upon mere fiction? Yes, why did they do this?. Mr. Colquhoun is ready to answer: Because, had they done so, a select few could not have been enabled to riot in idleness and riches, to waste and squander, in useless pomp and splendor, the fruits of the poor man's toil and labor. Neither could the mass of mankind, the great majority, have been reduced to bondage, slavery, vassallage, ignorance, want, poverty, crime, misery and wretchedness! Poverty being the source of riches, we could not enjoy those enviable blessings.

We have now done with these very benevolent and disinterested gentlemen, and turn our attention to the means of extricating ourselves from the difficulties brought upon us by those "paradoxical and unnatural institutions," which unjustly, unfeelingly and unrighteously have been imposed upon us. The probability is, those gentlemen never would

have given this evil-working code of laws to the world, had they have clearly seen what was to be the ultimate result of its operation. There is much excuse for them, also, on the ground that they were ignorant of the power of steam, and the improvements to be made in labor-saving machinery. They did not know that a nation would be enabled, by these means, to produce from five to ten times as much wealth as it would consume; or, perhaps, if they did see the truth, they were surrounded by such circumstances, that they dare not tell it. As those gentlemen have long since gone to the silent tomb, let us hope they rest in peace, though their errors we can in no wise tol

erate.

Instead of founding our scheme on the basis of a mere "fiction," as Mr. Blackstone says our present system of land tenure is, we propose to base it upon a real, solid natural foundation, a positive tangible fact the public lands of the United States, according to the plan adopted by the National Reformers; which plan is to prevent all future traffic in the public lands; instead of which, to give to every citizen a homestead (that is, all who choose to take it,) from the public domain, and, so long as he continues to be an actual settler upon it, government to secure him in its possession, and make it unalienable, giving him the liberty to sell or exchange his improvements upon it; but this in no case, except to a landless person; the land itself never to be confounded with property upon it-land itself, not being a product of human labor, cannot, in justice, bé valued by money, which is.

It is not necessary to enter into all the details of the subject, in this place, for if the reader clearly understands the fundamental principles already discussed, he must at once perceive the obvious necessity of the measure: of its practicability, there can be no doubt. The benefits to be derived from it, to the working classes, will be incalculable. In the first place, it will lessen competition among the working classes, by drawing many from the cities into the country, which will have the effect to enable those that remain to get better wages. In the next place, it will have a tendency to lessen the price of land held by speculators, and, in proportion as the free land cause progresses forward, land speculation, which is a blighting curse on our country, will go backward. This cause is, emphatically,

the working man's; it is his only means of defence against the all-absorbing, gormandizing influence of capital.

All

Let us, then, one and all, unite in this great moral work of reform, and insist upon the justice of our cause. we ask is our just rights. We ask nothing for ourselves, that we are not perfectly willing to grant to all. If we are wrong in this, we hope and trust kind Heaven will forgive us; if it be wicked to vindicate the cause of the oppressed and defenceless, then do we glory in our wick edness.

CHAPTER III.

AAMERIAN AUTHORS ON POLITICAL ECONOMY EXAMINED.

Ir is a lamentable fact, and no less true than astonishing, that, among all American writers on Political Economy, not one is to be found that has not sacrificed every consideration of justice and equity; every ennobling, heart-warm feeling of humanity; every idea of equal rights; every virtue; in short, everything that ought to dignify, elevate and adorn the human character; to the interests of sordid, selfish, all-absorbing, gormandizing Capital.

The working man whose necessities compel him to labor, or sell himself for wages, (having been deprived of his birthright in the soil,) has been considered, by said writers, in the same light, and no other, that they look upon a lot of timber in the forest, a bank of clay, or a bed of ore in the bowels of the earth, to be taken up and made use of so long, and no longer, than profit (which means products of other men's labor,) can be made by the use of them. As to a laboring man, having a soul or intellect, being entitled to equal rights with the capitalist, or to the same amount of protection; or that he possessed human capabilities of suffering pain, or enjoying happiness; or that it was the duty of any one to see that he was properly provided and cared for; was as far from their thoughts as would be the idea of providing comfortable quarters for the Alleghaney mountains during the winter season. No; the interests of capital were considered paramount to every

other consideration.

In proof of our assertion, that the worrking man, if poor, has never been considered in any other light than as a beast of burden, or a useful chattel, placed, by Providence, upon the earth, for the especial use and benefit of the capitalist, we shall quote the great Adam Smith, vol. 1, page 56. He says: "The wear and tear of a slave, it has been said, is at the expense of his master; but that of a free servant is at his own expense. The wear and tear of the latter, however, is, in reality, as much at the ex

pense of his master, as that of the former." Just as much! True; and that is, none at all; but, on the contrary, the master is maintained at the expense of his slaves, or servants. This is self-evident. For authority, we refer the reader to Dr. Paley, page 52: "The wages paid to journeymen and servants of every kind, must be such as to enable them to continue the race of journeymen and servants, as the demand of society may happen, from time to time, to require! But, though the wear and tear of a free servant be equally at the expense of his master, it generally costs him much less than that of a 'chattel slave!"" In plain, unsophisticated language, it amounts to this: when such animals as journeymen, servants, and laborers, become too numerous; that is, when capitalists have become overstocked and glutted with wealth, and can no longer make a profitable use of the poor wretches, then they must be suffered to perish, they and their little ones, by want, disease, starvation and death, while the surplus of their labor and toil is being wasted by their idle masters, in wanton and useless extravagance. But, when a demand arises for the use of such animals, then the breeding of them ought to be encouraged, and particular care ought to be taken that the breed does not become entirely extinct. Now, here we would ask, in all candor, would it not be much better, on the ground of humanity, in order to rid society of the surplus working classes, to adopt Mr. Ware's plan, and kill them off at once, rather than condemn them to the protracted, painful, lingering death by starvation, which is advocated by some professing Christian moral philosophers! Adam Smith has made one declaration, and, if true, is of much importance to the capitalist, which is, that a nominal free servant, journeyman, or laborer, will answer his purpose much better than a positive slave. That is, he can realize more wealth from the use of him, in a given time, than he can from a chattel slave, and with less risk of capital.

A capitalist finds a thing called a poor man without a home, deprived of his birthright in the soil, reduced to want and destitution, perhaps lying in the street; no matter by what means he got there, this is no business of the capitalist; his schoolma stes have taught him that neither justice, law, religion, or morality, requires him to relieve the miserable creature from his miserable condition, ex