S C R I B N E R ' S M A G A Z I N E Important ... - Rparchives.org
S C R I B N E R ' S M A G A Z I N E Important ... - Rparchives.org
S C R I B N E R ' S M A G A Z I N E Important ... - Rparchives.org
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
September 24, 1912.<br />
A l'''A\lli.', PAPER.<br />
Here again one must appeal lo the facts to<br />
settle the question.<br />
While it is quite true that in some industries<br />
the number of concerns hias decreased<br />
through the years it is also true that the number<br />
of owners has increased. Railroad's havei<br />
been swallowing each other until almost any<br />
trunk line contains, witbin it a score of defunct<br />
roads, but at the same time the ownership<br />
is' distributed by means of the stock<br />
among an increasing number of people.<br />
There is centralization in management going<br />
on continually because of the economy it af-<br />
•'fords, but the number of capitalistic owners is<br />
increasing in spite of Marx. What is true of<br />
railroad ownership is also true in farming<br />
During the last fifty years, excepting one<br />
decade, there has been an increase* in fli'e<br />
number of farmers and a decrease in the<br />
average size of tlhe farm,, while, according to<br />
Marx, it should be working exactly the other<br />
way. As shown by tax returns in Germany<br />
and England, thte number of those belonging<br />
to the tax paying classes is steadily growing.<br />
Especially ia that true of the owners of small<br />
properties'.<br />
Now if the capitalistic class is actually increasing<br />
it does not look hopeful for those<br />
whcj believe that class struggle will work<br />
their •salvation.<br />
3. A third inevitable of Scientific Socialism<br />
is that there will be a continually increasing-<br />
number of unemployed. Here again is<br />
opportunity to appeal to the facts. In this<br />
year 1913, after a century and a half of capitalism,<br />
where is the increasing! number of<br />
men looking for work ?<br />
That there always are unemployed in our<br />
cities is a fact which should be admitted and<br />
lamented, but where has the number been increasing<br />
for one hlundred and fifty years, or<br />
fifty years? In almost any line of business,<br />
except in the trades w.hich depend on particular<br />
seasons for employment, dO' we not find<br />
employers looking for laborers? Our industrial<br />
system is in urgent need of improvement,<br />
l)ut it does not seem to. help us forward in<br />
any wi-se to put up unsupported and unsupportable<br />
claims against it.<br />
As a matter of fact any thoughtful man<br />
knows that the claims of Marx do not fit the<br />
facts. The unemployed ane not increasing,<br />
not all laborers are paupers, wages are not<br />
Ming actually and relatively. The luxuries<br />
of fiftyyears ago are regarded as necessaries<br />
now. This does not mean that the wage system<br />
is a good system, nor the best possible<br />
system, but the system, as well as the devil,<br />
should have its due.<br />
According to Marx, the crisis of the class<br />
struggle will come when the capitalists becoming<br />
ever fewer, wlhile thb proletariat laborers<br />
are ever more numerous,, will give rise<br />
to a revolution in which! the laborers will recognize<br />
their power and will take possession<br />
of all the socially productive wealth in the<br />
land. Then only will class struggle end with<br />
the destruction of the capitalistic class and<br />
the order wbich; it has maintained.<br />
Now when one who chooses to call himself<br />
a Christian Socialist is forced to defend these<br />
doctrines of Marx, he usually insists that it<br />
is not necessary to stick by the teachings of<br />
men v\-h,io lived a half century ago and yet he<br />
is ready, as the editor of the Christian Socialist,<br />
to put up the Marxian theories as the<br />
creed which every Socialist must adopt.<br />
It is the beUef of 'tlhe writer that there is a<br />
place for Soialism based on tbe teachings of<br />
Christ, and that it will at some time be realized,<br />
but that is as far as possiible from tbe<br />
position that the godless society proposed by<br />
Marx and brought in by h,is godless methods<br />
is to be realized on earthi As soon would<br />
one propose Dante's Inferno as a social ideal.<br />
MORE MESSAGES FROM CHINA.<br />
By the Rev. W. J. McKnight.<br />
The first letter from which I quote is interesting<br />
for what the writer has to say about our<br />
Chinese Restriction Laws. It is always well to<br />
hear the other side. And whether or not we<br />
may be able to see as he sees, the advisability<br />
of putting our Church's views of the Chinese<br />
Restriction laws into the Chinese language is<br />
certainly worthy of our careful consideration. The<br />
writer of this letter, as will be noted, says again<br />
that he cannot see how any good, but possibly<br />
harm-, would be likely to come from translating<br />
our "critical views" into Chinese. Some time<br />
ago, 1 wrote to our Moderator, Dr. A. I. Robb,<br />
asking him for his candid opinion about the booklet.<br />
In his reply (I know he will not object<br />
to my quoting his words) he said, among other<br />
things: "Billy Sunday's 'imperative mood' would<br />
be better than long argument, however good and<br />
extensive the quotations. I mean by that that<br />
a simple statement of the truth, unsupported by<br />
argument or quotation, would probably have<br />
greater weight than a manner of presentation<br />
which itself would indicate that the matter is<br />
open to debate." Now these two men are saying<br />
practically the same thing, and their views<br />
when once brought to mind, seem to me to be<br />
self-evident. In fact, the booklet, as it now<br />
stands, was introduced more for the missionaries<br />
in China than for the Chinese, or rather for the<br />
Chinese through the medium of the missionaries.<br />
One has to have an occasion for doing<br />
certain things. Here is the letter—the first part<br />
of it, the latter half being an elaboration of<br />
what is quite fully stated in the part quoted:<br />
China New Testament Miss'on,<br />
Pakhoi, China, July 29th, 1913.<br />
W. J. McKnight,<br />
2849 S. Salina St..<br />
Syracuse, N. Y., U. S. A,<br />
Dear Brother in Christ:<br />
The nice little book: "A Message to China"<br />
reached and interested me a few days since,<br />
and now an hour is being stolen to formulate<br />
a word of reply, in accord with the request received<br />
therewith.<br />
It has been my privilege to be in this country<br />
but a little more than four years and since my<br />
travels could not be called extensive, therefore<br />
these opinions are not offered in confidence of<br />
a full apprehension, but with a knowledge that<br />
even so brief a residence in China has greatly<br />
changed some of my former views. For instan-ce,<br />
when living in Los Angeles, your views of our<br />
Chinese restriction laws were quite fully shared<br />
by me, and weeks of time were spent helping Chinese<br />
boys to establish their right (which I never<br />
doubted, and ,vhicn, in some instances, was a<br />
fact) to remain in America. I have appeared<br />
weekly before the U. S. District Court for successive<br />
months taking Chinese to have their<br />
cases continued so that they might not have to<br />
be detained in jail. I have secured bonds for them,<br />
and deemed the terms and amounts C?2,5iJ0.l 0<br />
each) unjust and excessive, but after seeing<br />
from what environment those boys came and becoming<br />
somewhat familiar with their tricks,<br />
characteristics and aspirations, the conclusion is<br />
forced home: "that restriction laws were a right<br />
effort to meet an absolute necessity." That<br />
hardship might be put upon some, and unnece-gsary<br />
harshness should occasionally appear among<br />
the U. S. Ofiicials, is almost certain, but that<br />
some such measures were inevitable for the preservation<br />
of America's institutions, and that these<br />
restrictions will ultimately benefit the Chinese<br />
themselves, is no longer any doubt in my mind.<br />
China and Japan could land on shores not their<br />
own, ten millions per year for the next ten years;<br />
not their good men, however, but men accustomed<br />
to do the work that is done by machinery<br />
and beasts in many countries—awaiting no Invitation,<br />
caring for no welcome, but with ivare<br />
permission. In these days of easy ocean transportation,<br />
U. S. would without doubt, be made<br />
the delta for an ever growing stream of immigration,<br />
with the result that the eventual restrictions<br />
would be much more of a struggle and<br />
would affect a multitude within our borders,<br />
brought there largely by the enterprise and particularly<br />
for the benefit of Steamship Companies.<br />
From the foregoing, it is doubtless clear, that<br />
in my opinion, your criticism of U. S. restriction<br />
laws ought not to be printed in the Chinese<br />
language. They are expert copyists and wonderful<br />
memorizers as compare with their disposition<br />
to follow difficult or obstruse propositions<br />
through to a logical conclusion. Thus for one of<br />
the few who could read your article with the<br />
least discernment of your motive, there are ten<br />
thousand who could be influenced by unscrupulous<br />
talkers into the thought that U. S. citizens<br />
themselves are acknowledging unjust laws<br />
against China, and that to break such laws would<br />
be a righteous act. This might lessen their already<br />
pitifully small regard for any authority<br />
aside from actual force. In the Review of Reviews<br />
for June (Page 648) may be seen these<br />
significant words: "Both shores of the Pacific<br />
may belong to Asiatic peoples two hundred<br />
years hence or even within a shorter time." Will<br />
existing facts allow us to easily persuade ourselves<br />
that this is not a possibility?<br />
As to our Constitution's non-recognition of the<br />
Deity, I can see eye to eye with you, and am<br />
led to wonder how any true Christian can fall<br />
to regret this almost inconceivable omission by<br />
men known to fear God. And while longing to<br />
see public acknowledgment of our dependence<br />
upon God written on our basic law, I cannot perceive<br />
any help or good to come from a translation<br />
of your critical views into Chinese, but<br />
on the contrary, believe that harm might be done<br />
by taking that course. The Chinese have seen<br />
fit to follow the Constitution of U. S. somewhat<br />
in framing one for their new republic, but China<br />
is not a unit; dissentions project themselves persistently<br />
from many quarters, and to put into the<br />
hands of would-be leaders here, differing or critical<br />
views as expressed by the citizens of U. S.,<br />
is to certainly augment 'contention and afford material<br />
for self-seeking politicians.<br />
Your appeal to the people to recognize in their<br />
written law, God, as the source of all government,<br />
and for an upright walk before Him, is too<br />
good and clear to be lost. Untold blessing might<br />
bo derived from a translation and liberal djstrl-