Ror oneness a AC ee oe il : » G43 rr eS oe | i University of Virginia Library AC;1;.G43;V.1;NO.9:1923 gui”4 1ee ers oH Z : toe Beers oe go oh so eS ree = pac ah Be heen Sree eS + bese trio sss are! SS PTs a bat as ee Let et ate eae etre Berks Urata poten eon tae errs Lt aera peut ey Snes ae i eas ee te SO Pint Bar Se rs Pas oe ot tects SESS ea 3 E os SPiaice pa neck 3 heats caBulletin of the University of Georgia i = Volume XXII MAY, 1923 Number 10 Nf | ene, i Eo | Special Series: Addresses Vol. ko. No. 9 Ae we gl kK) Séheggh is = "fy < é The Insecurity of Private Property By Judge Samuel H. Sibley United States Courts, Northern District of Georgia | wntered at the Post Office at Athens, Ga., as Second Class Matter, August 31, 1905, ander Act of Congress of July 16th, 1904. Issued Monthly by the University. | Serial No. 348 PRICE 15 CENTS7 + nr age om re rh IT TARE ie be mt t Ji ‘oF . awit ee ~ ViRiSiINIA g %8. : Poe. “IETS ES VIP Ee eae ATTOSYLTS SHARLOTTES VILLE ra. 2 ISM ROY : {i riparia ft Ree 5 bah 3 EF SPECIAL SERIES: ADDRESSES Bulletins in this series are issued at no fixed interval. The priee affixed is charged to non-residents of the State of Georgia; to others the bulletins are free. The following bulletins, without special num- bering, should be included in this series: D. C. Barrow, The University, its Past, Present and Future. Serial number 199. Free. C. K. Nelson, Fundamental Requirements of an Enduring Democracy. Serial number 212. Free. D. C. Barrow, County Spirit. Serial number 246. Free. Addresses before the School of Commerce. Serial number 260. Ex- hausted. D. C. Barrow, The Day’s Work. Serial number 283. Free. C. M. Andrews, Present Day Thoughts on the American Revolution. Serial number 305. Price 15c. H. C. White, The Evolution of the University as Interpreted by the Memories of Age. Serial number 327. Free. D. C. Barrow, Co-Education at the University. Serial number 336. Free.The Insecurity of Private Property’ JUDGE SAMUEL H. SIBLEY United States Courts, Northern District of Georgia. Webster defines property as ‘‘the exclusive right of possess-. ing, enjoying and disposing of a thing.’’ Upon the individual’s free exercise of this right to any possible extent and with the least interference by public law has largely been builded the wealth and greatness of the United States. We have relied upon it as a necessary and sufficient stimulus of private effort, and as the cause and the reward of all enterprise. Our laws and constitutions have been much devoted to the defini- tion and protection of property rights, so that it has some- times seemed that the protection of private property had be- come the great object of government. To say that the insti- tution of private property in this country is in peril of great modification, if not destruction, is startling, but such is the truth. Attention to the trend of judicial and legislative action for the past few decades, and to world movements in the past few years, forces the reality of this danger upon the thoughtful. We will examine first, the organized movement in this direction; then the less obvious because regular en- encroachments under our own institutions; and lastly make some general observations upon our proper attitude toward both. For a long period of time it has been contended by some schools of radical thought that private property was the root of all social evil, that modification and treatment would never be a cure, but that the only relief was abolition of the in- stitution. The Socialist idea, internationally organized, has figured in politics for many years. The First and Second Socialist Internationals have passed into history. The World War disrupted this organization, and its representative parties in most of the countries at war. The Third Communist In- ternational at Moscow, Russia, on March 2, 1919, advertised its organization by a manifesto signed by Lenine, Trotsky, and others, setting forth the world wide aim of the organiza- 1 Phi Beta Kappa address, at the University of Georgia Commencement, June, 1920.ting the co-operation of all of like mind, jand proposing by the ‘‘direct action’’ of violence and revolution the immediate achievement of its ends. AS & part of this organization the Russian Soviet Republic functions as the first and typical child of the proposed political family, in this country, passing by the troubles of the war period, we Gnd at its end the Socialist party here in a ferment. During 1919 there developed a slpit into what was called the Right Wing, and the Left Wing, the former advocating the achieve- ment of aims by the slow process of reform and legislation, the latter advocating direct action and revolution. On Sep- tember 1, 1919, the Left Wing, claiming a membership of 55,000 organized as the Communist Party of America, and applied for membership in the Communist International at tion, and invi Moscow. Separate from these, and with aims of extending apparently to the abolition of private wealth so much as the subjection of industry to the workers control, have appeared im strength in the North-west the Industrial Workers of the World. They resemble the Communists, however, in their advocacy of violent and revolutionary action. So the Non-partisan League, strong in the Dakotas and Minnesota. resembles the Right Wing Socialists in seeking to subject business and industry by peaceful and lawful means to the control of the state. They have been in control politically in the Dakotas for several years, and have ventured the state into banking and insurance, erain buying and selling, housebuilding, and other businesses on terms of preference and taxation which are calculated to destroy all private competition. During 1919 a strong effort was made to pull the powerful organization of the American Federation of Labor into the radical fold, usme the slogan of the I. W. W., *‘One bie union’’—an effort that might have succeeded if the steel and coal strikes engineered under the idea in 1919 had sueceeded, but which has apparently been defeated, for the present at least, largely through the efforts and leadership of Mr. Gompers. Of a very different aim from the Radical Socialists, but agreeing in revolutionary methods, are the Anarchists, or- ganized under the name of the Russian Workers of the United 2States and Canada, who also issued their official manifesto in 1919. Their aim is not that of the Socialist, to subject all private enterprise and wealth to the supervision and control and benefit of the State, but on the other hand to abolish the State as an unnecessary and hurtful institution, interfering with the liberty of mankind without any sufficient justifica- tion. To him the Socialist seems to be proposing to increase the slavery of mankind by substituting a more powerful master, the State. But as he agrees with the Communist in the ne- cessity of overthrowing by revolution the present political organization, the two are avowedly working together for the present, each counting on developments to show the other his error when it comes to substituting the new regime. The official manifestos and programs of these and other bodies have been collected by the Attorney General (Mr. Palmer) and issued from the Government press at Washine- ton in a pamphlet entitled ‘‘Red Radicalism as Described by its Leaders.’’ They make interesting if disquieting reading. Let a few extracts speak their drift: Constitution of the Socialist Party, January 13, 1920. ‘“The economic basis of present day society is the private ownership and control of the socially necessary means of pro- duction and the exploitation of the workers who operate these means of production for the benefit of those who own them. The interests of the two classes. are diametrically Op POSseda. 4 2. The capitalist class by controlling the old political parties controls the powers of the State and uses them to entrench its position. The workers must wrest the control of the government from the hands of these masters, and use its powers for the upbuilding of the new social order, the co-operative commonwealth. The fundamental aim of the Socialist party is to bring about the social ownership and democratic control of all the means of production, and elimi- nate profit, rent and interest, and make it impossible for any to share the product without sharing the burden of labor.”’ The aim of the Left Wing, or Communist party, is the same, but the means proposed to attain it are not peaceful and patient polities, but ‘‘direct action’’: Communist Party of America, Sept, 1, 1919; Constitution: “‘Sec. 1. The name of this organization shall be the Com- munist Party of America. Its purpose shall be the education and organization of the working class for the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat, the abolition of the 2 0capitalistic system and the establishment of Communistie society. : ‘Sée, 2. The emblem of the party shall be a button with the fieure of the earth in the center in white and gold lines and a red flag across the face, bearing the inseription, ‘all power to the workers.’ ”’ Mamnfesto: ‘The Communist Party is fundamentally a party of action. It brings to the workers a consciousness of their oppression, of the ‘impossibility of improving their condition under ¢ cap- italism. The Communist Party directs the workers’ struggle under capitalism, developing fuller forms and purposes in the struggle, culminating in the mass action of the revolution. The Communist International represents a socialism in com- plete accord with the revolutionary character of the class struggle. It unites all conscious revolutionary forces. It wages war equally against imperialism and modern socialism, each of which has demonstrated its inability to solve the problems that now press down upon the workers. Z The old order is in decay. Civilization is in collapse. The workers must prepare for the proletarian revolution and the ecommunistic reconstruction of society. The Communist In- ternational calls the Workers of the World to unite. ‘The Communist Party recognizes that the American Fed- eration of Labor is reactionary and a bulwark of capitalism. It shall be the major task of the Communist Party to agitate for a general union organization embracing the I. W. W., the W. I. I. U., to persuade unionists from their labor organiza- tions, ete. . . . Strikes are developing verging on the revolutionary action and in which the suggestion of the pro- letarian dictatorship is apparent, the strike workers trying to usurp the functions of industry and government as seen in the Seattle and Winnepege general strikes. The Communists will endeavor to broaden and deepen these strikes, making them general and militant, and developing a general political strike.’’ Anarchists Mamfesto, 1919: Of religion it says: “‘Its lackeys, high scholars, besoin a shameful sermon on religion and metaphysical idealism to create or restore a most senseless system of morals. And all this merely to poison the working class with spiritual venom, to lull their consciences with metaphysical opium, and under the protection of God and morality to maintain their cruel dominion, the empire of cash and profit.’’ Of Socialism it says: ‘‘We can therefore say with con- fidence that collectivism (Socialism) is only a further develop- ment of capitalism. The nationalization of industry is being completed little by little by the trusts. Collectivism crowns nlthis elementary process, and delivers the means of production to one trust, selected by the people. But as the slave could not be made free by giving him the right to choose his master. so the hired laborer remains a slave at the present time although he obtains the right to choose his employer. Uol- lectivism is only State capitalism. The workman becoines a complete slave to his master, the State - . . ‘The State becomes the sole owner of capital, the sole employed, the scle holder of authority. The authority of owners, judges and police will be concentrated in the hands of a single master, the State, omnipotent, almighty.’’ Of the proposed revolution it Says: °“‘We musi at the first favorable opportunity proceed to an immediate seizure of all the means of production and all articles of eonstmption and make the working class the masters in fact of all gveneral wealth. At the same time we must mercilessly destroy all remains of government authority and class domination, liber- ate the prisoners, demolish prisons and police officers, destroy all papers pertaining to private ownership of property, all fences and boundaries, and burn all certificates of indebted- ness. In a word we must take care that everything is wiped from the earth that is a reminder of the right of private ownership of property; to blow up barracks, vendarme and police administration. To shoot the most prominent military and police officers must be the concern of the revolting work- ing people. In the work of destruction we must be merciless, for the slightest weakness on our part may afterwards cause the working class a whole sea of needless blood. Who created all this wealth if not you workers? To whom should it belong if not to you? What then—is it possible that you will suffer and starve in the midst of a sea of products created by your toil? Throw away your slavish respect for the law. Take everything you need. Feed all your hungry. Put on clean holiday attire. Destroy your dirty collars and move into the luxurious palaces of the idle rich. Whosoever shall hinder you, remove him from your path as a foe to your - freedom.’’ These are not the vaporings of some individual crank. They are the deliberate official utterances of organized parties of men, of. unknown numbers. They range from the lawful effort of the Right Wing Socialists to the bloody desperateness of the Anarchist. But behind all is the same aim, the abolition of private ownership of capital, and the same bait to the poor and discontented, the same appeal to class hatred and distrust, the same body-blow to all effort at co-operation and peace between employer and employed. Besides the secret and in- sof scattering such poison, of the extent and have no direct information, we learn by the Department of sidious means activity of which we from a carefully prepared list made published and circulated in the United and magazines to the number of 222, in foreign languages, 105 in English, besides 144 which are imported,, making a total of 471 publications. These mainly advertisements, showing that they have either a or strong financial support otherwise. We Justice that there are States radical journals carry no large circulation, ight still feel no alarm in this country of free speect and a lying on the good sense of experience of our m free press, re people, but for the peculiar mental and economie state that has followed the war. Aside from the suppressed hatreds of con- flicting nationalities among us, and aside from the fiood ot discontents that have impelled much of our immigrant popu- lation to our shores and that still abide with them, our entire population is in a state of unrest. Immense war profits and prosperity brought on a tide of eraft and selfishness, following the exaltation and sacrifice of 1917 and 1918. The reaction setting in has caused much financial loss. Our working people, having experienced wages and ease never before known, will not readily surrender them and return to pre-war conditions. Serious discontents are inescapable in the readjustments that must come. Our soldiers, finding that while they were bleed- ing for the government in France, others all the way from the day laborer to the large contractor were bleeding that same eovernment at home, have felt a serious resentment at the inequality, voiced loudly by those who call for the soldiers’ bonus, or adjusted compensation. If the case lay between the soldier and the grafter, whether laborer or contractor, its justice would be plain. Doubtless in any future emergency drafts will be made not only for soldiers, but for needed sup- plies, and for every service that the various classes of citizens can furnish, without increase of prices or wages. But in the now burdened condition of the public purse a present bonus will not be found possible, and the discontent of the soldier will abide. The spirit of discontent with law and government is everywhere apparent, and crimes of all sorts are flagrant. The principle of ‘‘direct action’’—the old principle on which savage force has ever moved since Cain slew Abel since David 6took Uriah’s wife and Ahab Naboth’s vineyard—is finding expression not only in repeated strikes, both ‘‘reeular’’ and outlaw,’’ but also in activities of the Ku Klux Klan, and tose imitatine them. Here indeed is a fertile soil for the industriously seattered seeds of radicalism. spirit of foresight and wisdom to early Obsta Principiss. God give us the meet what may arise. If militant radicalism holds no dangers against the insti- tutions of our government. ] et us look next at the evolutionary tendencies which these institutions are exhibiting in their workings. The Declaration of Independence was a revolu- tionary document. It proclaimed as the great natural rights which governments were created to preserve, the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In the constitution, State and Federal, which were framed after the Revolution was achieved, life, liberty and property are the things much dealt with, little being said about the more elusive subject of happiness. Private property, as we have before remarked, was set up as a prime right, entrenched against both publie and private encroachment, and became a cornerstone of our polity and prosperity. Yet the institution of private property may be almost completely altered without change in the Federal Constitution, and may be totally destroyed by such peaceful and orderly changes. The Federal Constitution alone is spoken of here, both because it is regarded as the principal bulwark of security against change, and because whatever is said of it is true of most State Constitutions also. In probably all of them occur prohibitions against laws impairing the obligation of contracts and the famous words that “life, liberty and property shall not be taken without due process of law,’” and that ‘‘Private property shall not be taken for publie use without just compensation being paid.’’ These are regarded as impregnable bulwarks. Let us look at some of the holes that have been judicially declared to exist, through which legislative and executive power may at any moment attack almost to the destruction of private property, despite these constitutional provisions. 1. First is the qualification impressed on all property, of Eminent Domain. This right of the government, State or Federal, to take for public use any property needed for such a| may at any time deprive any one of his But the deprivation 1s be made, the justice 1@ as courts are not use, is undoubted, anc home, factory, or other pOsseSSIONS. not complete, in that compensation must of which a court and jury must hx, 50.10% this constitutional provision corrupt, and juries are honest, ‘ommunist schemes in thei? stands in the way of Socialist and ( full expression. 29 Taxation is a most important qualification of the property right. The power of the eovernment to tax 1s established by constitutions which undertake to protect private property. Yet the line between taxation and confiscation is hard to draw. It is supposed that the benefits of government are the compensation paid by eovernment for property taken by taxation, but they are often not seen to be proportionate, or apparent. A tax of course must be for a public purpose, laid on some reasonable basis and not arbitrarily, and the same must be doubtless should be reasonable in amount, and not be equiv- alent to. a taking of the thing taxed. Yet it has always been recognized that the ‘‘power to tax is the power to destroy”’ and many taxes have been laid and sustained for that purpose. Protective tariffs are taxes thus perverted, but are now suffered without question. The Federal tax on the circulation of notes of State banks is really a prohibition. The Federal tax on narcotic drugs is made the basis of drastic regulation which amount to a police control over them, but has-been sus- tained as constitutional. The tax laid on articles made by child labor was similarly intended, but held unconstitutional ; as was the tax on operations carried on in grain and cotton exchanges. These last decisions seem to mark a tendency op- posite to those formerly made in which it was said that the real purpose of the legislature in laying a tax would not be judicially enquired into, if the tax was within constitutional power. But it must be admitted that a vast power to affect the value of business and property by taxation exists in the legislatures. The income tax especially offers itself as an in- strument for the appropriation substantially of the wealth of the country. To tax a factory enterprise approximately to the extent of its net income, is to take the factory in effect. And the invention of graduated taxation is not only a way of ‘aising money, but also an effective though indirect way of §equalizing wealth, that may go far towards realizing one ot the aims of the Communist. 3. Note the Police Power, another recognized but undefined avenue whereby private property may be affected for the public benefit. A business and an investment in it, entirely lawful, may by the growth of population be declared a nuis- ance to health or even comfort, and required to be abolished. In 1873 the famous Slaughter House Cases were decided, whereby the power to stop the conduct of abattoirs in the neighborhood of New Orleans was affirmed.” In Fertilizer Co., vs. Hyde Park, 97 U.S. 659 extensive fertiliz- er factories which had been established in a remote locality were held to forfeit their right to existence because of the subse- quent growth of population in their neighborhood. In Mugler vs. Kansas, 123 U. S. 623, the right of communities to prohibit the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors was: settled, although valuable businesses and investments were destroyed, which were lawful when undertaken. Collision between pri- vate interests, whether contracts, business, or investment, and the public interest as defined by the legislature, may at any time cause great property loss without any right to compen- sation from any body. The present state of the law was re- cently thus stated in Atlantie Coast Line Ry. vs. Goldsboro, Zea2 U.S. 000: ‘Tt is settled that neither the ‘contract clause’ nor the ‘due process’ clause has the effect of overriding the power of the State to establish all regulations which are reasonably neces- sary to.secure the health, safety, good order, eomfort, or general welfare of the community; that this power cannot be abdicated nor bargained away, and is inalienable even by express grant; and that all contract and property rights are held subject to its fair exercise. And the enforcement of un- compensated obedience to a regulation established under this power for the public health or safety is not an unconstitutional taking of property without compensation or without due pro- cess of law.’’ Weigh each of the words in this quotation, reflect upon the field that its doctrine may cover, and ponder the lengths to which a radical majority in a legislature may carry them. 4. The right of the public to regulate property and business ‘Coffected with a public interest,’’ is another very important and rapidly developing encroachment upon private property 216 Wall. 28. ta nana Cs mabe tc nana aii tides aa eens igrt aa AES steer rights, as previously understood. This doctrine got 16S, rst important recognition in 1876, when the State of Illinois un- dertook to prescribe the charges that should be made for handling grain at the grain elevators. Of course the current charges were greatly reduced, and the profitableness of the business greatly affected. The decision of the Supreme Court is found in Munn vs. [llinois, 94 U. S. 118. The dissenting minority, let by Justice Field, stated the unsuccessful view thus: ‘The power of the State over the property of a citizen under the constitutional guaranty is well defined. The State may take his property for public use upon just compensation being paid. It may take a portion of his property by way of taxation for the support of the government. It may control the use and possession of his property, so far as may be neces- sary for the protection of the rights of others, and to secure to them the equal use and enjoyment of their property. The doctrine that each one shall so use his own as not to injure his neighbor is the rule by which every member of society must possess and enjoy his property, and all legislation es- sential to secure this common and equal enjoyment is a legiti- mate exercise of State authority. The power of the State over the property of the citizen does not extend beyond such Tomas: The majority, through Chief Justice Waite. said: ‘“When the owner of property devotes it to a use in which the public has an interest, he in effect grants to the public an interest in such use and must to the extent of that interest submit to be controlled by the public for the common good, as long as he maintains that use. He may withdraw his grant by discontinuing the use. Property becomes clothed with a public interest when used in a manner to male Hie one public consequence and affect the community at large.” “ie regulation of the public elevators was sustained. On this foundation the regulation of railroad charges, of telegraph and telephone and water and light and heating companies, quickly followed. So-called public service com- missions are a part of every State government. The right to withdraw the property from public use suggested by Chief Justice Waite is not now allowed to many such enterprises without the consent of the commissions. Previous contracts fairly made must give way before such regulations of charges: Union Dry Goods Co., vs. Ga. Publie Bemus Comp 246°. O° 372" The kinds of ene which 10may be declared of public concern have been steadily ex- tended. The business of imsurance was included in the eategory in German Ins. Co., vs. Kansas, 233 U. 5S. 389, over a vigorous dissent led by Justice Lamar. It was there said by the majority: ‘(A business by circumstances and its nature may rise from private to public concern and consequently become subject to vovernmental regulation. ’’ In discussing the Dakota Non-Partisan League laws on this line, it was said in Green vs. Frazier, 258 Fed. 674: “The line of legislative power has been steadily advanced as society has come to believe increasingly that its welfare can best be promoted by public as distinguished from private ownership of certain business enterprises. Laws which at one time were held invalid have at a later period been sustained by the same court. No judge can investigate judicial decisions rendered during the past ten vears without being impressed with the rapid extension of State activity into fields that were formerly private.’’ Perhaps the climax was capped by a general statute of Okla- homa, which provided: ‘Whenever any business, by reason of its nature, extent, or the existence of a virtual monopoly therein, is such that the public must use the same or its service . . . said business is a public business and subject to be controlled by the State as to all of its practices, processes, rules and charges. ”’ A commission is established to execute the provisions of the law. A laundry in Oklahoma City was held by the commission to come within the definition of the law, and its charges were regulated. The statute was upheld in Oklahoma Operating Co., vs. Love (U. S. Supreme Court, March 22, 1920). With these precedents, it is difficult to foresee the extent to which business heretofore regarded as private may be heid to be public and regulated as fully as we have become ac- customed to see the railroads regulated. 5. The right to dispose of property after death or 10 con- templation of death has been in recent years very much nar- rowed by inheritance taxes. It is settled law that the right to transmit property to an heir or legatee is not a natural right, is not a necessary part of the idea of private property, but is dependent upon the laws of the Stae, and subject to State control notwithstanding the constitutional euaranties ito private property. One has really only a life estate in his property, with a power of appointment atter death—a power wholly under legislative control. Though this power lies with the State governments, the basis of inheritance taxation has in the later decisions been broadened so that the Federal Government is also declared to have the right to impose such taxes. The breadth of judicial announcements on this subject may be seen in the following quotations: Mayer vs. Grima, 8 Howard (U. 8.) 492, speaking of a State inheritance tax law, Chief Justice Taney says: ‘“‘The law in question is nothing more than an exercise of the power which every State and sovereignty possesses, of regulating the manner and the terms of which property, real and personal, within its domain may be transmitted by last will and testament, or by inheritance; and of prescribing who shall and who shall not be capable of taking it. . . . And if a State may deny this privilege altogether it follows that when it grants it, 1t may annex to the grant any condition which it supposes to be required by its interests and policy.”’ Ul vs. Fox, 94 U. 8, 320: ‘“The power of the State to regulate the tenure of real prop- erty within her limits and the modes of its acquisition and transfer, and the rules of descent, and the extent to whiel: a testamentary disposition of it may be exercised by its owncr, is undoubted.”’ Ue me ave) Perkins 163 WW. S.627: ‘“While the laws of all civilized States recognize in every citizen the absolute right to his own earnings and to the eujoy- ment of his own property and the increase thereof during his life, except so far as the State may require him to coatcibute his share for the public expenses; the right to dispose of his property by will has always been considered a creature purely of statute and within legislative control. . .. . Possess- ing then the plenary power indicated it necessarily flows that the State, in allowing property to be disposed of by wili and in designating who shall take such property when there is no will, may prescribe such conditions not forbidden Dy Jos organic law as the legislature may deem expedient.’’ Magoun vs. Illinois, 170 U. S. 283: “The right to take property by devise or descent is the creature of the law and not a natural right or privilege, and therefore the authority which conferred it may impose con- ditions upon it.’’ 7 With the law thus established, it will be seen what a field for operations is opened up in each State for a bare radical majority. The right of legislative control go broadly an- 12nounced might be pushed to the extremity of denying the right to transmit property after death, and thus in a generation the State might be made by escheat the universal heir and legatee. With use made only of the power to tax inheritances still the principle of graduation in the tax, as in the case of income taxation, opens up an easy method not only of raising money, but of levelling wealth, and the tendency to use it for both purposes is pronounced. So long as the classification for the graduation of the tax makes its burden fall on a minority, the tax will be popular. 6. One thinks of an escape from inheritance taxation by putting the ownership in corporations which never die. In re- ply not only must the stock descend, but it must be remem- bered that immortal corporations are created no more. They are now made of limited life, and by the terms of their charters subject to almost instant annihilation. Indeed, they may be made a class by themselves for most purposes of legislation, and merely because they are corporations, the creatures ot the State, they may be made to operate under any regulation and on any terms that their creators require, or else be denied the right to exist at all. Our Jaw ‘books are full of require- ments in the way of taxes and other things laid on corporations only. Some businesses, as insurance, can be carried on only by a corporation. A frequently urged remedy for business abuses is that the business be required to be incorporated, and so brought under direct control of the law. This has been urged as a remedy for unreasonable action by labor unions. It will be seen then that incorporation, so far from being a help, is a snare to those who would thereby defend private enterprise and property from public interference. These are some avenues for legislative encroachment with- out the slower and more difficult process of constitutional amendment. But by such amendments almost any change which revolution could accomplish, might soon be made. The Federal constitution reserves from the power of amendment probably only the right of each State to equal representation in the senate. While the amendment of this constitution is purposely made slow and difficult, we have seen amendments accomplished with surprising ease. And the effect of them is to impose on the minority, including possibly twelve whole 19 Lo a a Es I ll oe ci et al il naa ntl ILSStates. the views and wishes of the majority. We have seen this exemplified in the recent prohibition amendment, as earlier in the slavery amendment. Thus the instrument which we regarded as the Palladium of our liberties, May prove an ambuscade for the conservative. And this amending power, which is our safety-valve against revolution, and the terminal bud of our organic growth, seems always to have operated in the direction of direct popular power and increased au- thority in the government over person and property—both socialistic demands. The first ten amendments, adopted imme- diately after the Constitution itself and in the atmosphere of caution then prevalent, are not included in the generaliza- tion, for they are practically parts of the original instrument. They constitute the individual’s bill of rights against the power of the central government. The eleventh amendment affecting the suability of a State in Federal courts, is of the same temper and time. The twelfth sought to bring the se- lection of president and vice president more into harmony with the majority will. The thirteenth, abolishing slavery and involuntary servitude except as a punishment for erime, of course swept away a vast amount of property, ratifying what was regarded in its inception as a very radical and un- constitution idea, and committing to the Federal government a new field of responsibility. The fourteenth amendment, fix- ing citizenship in the Federal government as a thing above and independent of, that in a State also went far in pro- hibiting the States from doing things which their own econ- stitutions theretofore alone had _ restrained them from. The “due process of law’’ and “equal protection of. the law’’ clauses of this amendment are today the most fruitful sources of civil litigation under Federal authority. The fifteenth amendment extending the right of suffrage, tended to give more power to the less conservative elements of the population. The sixteenth amendment gave the Federal government, in the power to tax incomes from whatever source derived, a tre- mendous weapon, as we have seen, for the management or destruction of private business and wealth. The seventeenth robbed the Senate of its former conservatism in makine it directly elected by the people, and immediately responsible to the popular vote. The eighteenth amendment establishing’ 14prohibition, however commendable and necessary it may seem, is of course a radical regulation at last, marking a great ad- vance in the march of Federal power. And the nineteenth amendment, extending the suffrage to women, is again an enlargement of the electorate in line with the demands of advancing radicalism—perfectly realized in the constitution of Soviet Russia. There are few, if any, red radicals in Georgia. Even the Right Wing Socialists claim no organization of any sort in this State. Probably all in this audience believe in the es- sential soundness of the old order and wish no great change. But organized labor, and perhaps other influences, are here seeking many reforms. And tied as we are to the body of the republic, we are not without direct interest in the doings in other states. Indeed, the condition of Europe is our own con- cern, because in an economic sense as well as a military one, the Atlantic Ocean dried up in 1917. How shall we meet the radical impulse by which the world is beset? Doubtless there are many individuals involved who are simply criminals and to be dealt with as suech—many actuated by common greed or laziness or the mere excitement of change. But it cannot be denied also that among Socialists and even Anarchists are many high souls with exalted ideals, wrestling with the real evil in the world, and believing they see a remedy for it. Forceful repression is never a remedy for unselfish though ill-judged reform—it simply changes the reform spirit into the martyr or aim must never be recognized. Class hatred must not be en- tinguished. Passion and excitement must be strictly avoided. They only beget their kind. Personal touch must be main- tained with those who differ in opinion from us. A division of our citizenry into classes, irreconcilably opposed in interest or aim must never be recognized. Class hatred must not be en- couraged. A common aim of justice intended must be pre- sented to all. Each must honestly try to get the other’s view- point, feel his grievance and understand the remedy he pro- poses. There is much that is unwholesome in exaggerated private fortunes, now regarded as the capital prize of industry and success, and in the leisure they allow and the luxury they encourage. The demand that all men should work is backed by the wisdom of the Bible. The doom of Adam’s race was 15 eae Pe nen rae PON ape caa Wee ret fon lg em nee oe ON SU RON Re ear Le‘In the sweat of thy brow shalt thou eat bread until thou return unto the ground.’’ (Gen. 3-19,) and the command through Moses was ‘‘Six days shalt thou labor,’’ as well as “Thou chal not steal’? and “Thou shalt mot covet. Jesus taught ‘‘Take heed and beware of covetousness, for a man’s life consisteth not in the multitude of things which he pos- sesseth.”? (Luke 12-15). And Paul set forth as the ideal of Christian economic effort: ‘‘Let him that stole steal no more, but let him labor, working with his hands the thing that 18 good, that he may have, to give to him that needeth.’’ (Eph. 4-28). He also pointed out the moral snare of riches assert- ing that the ‘‘love of money is a root of all sorts of evil.’’ (2 Tim. 6-8). The best philosophy and experience abundantly backs these statements. Mankind are not yet good enough to maintain without corruption the government of the Socialist, nor to live in the Anarchistic paradise of a world without a policeman. We must also be ready to submit to the settled will of the majority,.as we now demand the same of others. Experiment is often far better than argument to settle an economic prob- lem. The great enterprise in Russia ought to be kept fully before the eyes of its sympathizers and foes, that no lesson may be lost that can be gained from it. So the more moderate experiments of North Dakota are worth the most careful watching, that developments there may be known and under- stood everywhere. If we are driven to modify present ideas of private wealth, let us separate in thought, past from future acquisitions, dealing with justice by those who have acted on the faith of former laws. In lke manner distinguish in thought true capital, that is wealth devoted to industry, from private wealth, that which is devoted to private consumption. The latter manifestly should not be controlled if the former must. I, for one, while having strong convictions about it. am willing to know the truth, and find out what is best. Cautious experiment to determine what is practicable must eo with earnest thought to determine what is desirable. Such a policy will keep the peace and find the truth. This country’s capacity for happiness and usefulness to mankind is far from exhausted. Under God’s favor it will] long continue to bless its people and inspire and instruct other countries of the world. 16PX Gd S70 Gace