DEBATE ON SOCIALISM.

Auckland Star, Volume XVII, Issue 202, 28 August 1886, Page 2

DEBATE ON SOCIALISM.

TtiK usual fortnightly meetingo( the Auckland Alheiiii'tiin was held last evening' in Robson's llooins. Mr TC. VS". llurton in the chair. After some ordinary business had been transacted tho Chairman culled upon Rev. 1). Bruce to open tin- debato upon Roy. Mr Gulliver's paper on Socialism. Mr liruco complimented the lecturer upon the excellence of his paper, and admitted that in inuiiv respects he held with the views expressed. He pointed out that not alone in the New Testament was there to he found evidences of Socialism, but in tho Old Testament also, and throughout the whole polity of the Hebrew nation, csnechillv in dealing Willi tho land of the State, lie referred lo the many aspects of Bii.-ialisni.and believed that byco-operationalone would ils best features he secured. Mr Cuiinull thought thut with all our boasted civilisation il was a disgrace that men could not agree to divide fairly the bounties of a fertile soil. He nisi) was in favour of co-operation, and Maid that thoro was nothing to prevent labour and cupilul joining to the great advantage of both. Mr A. llourdman, in an excellent speech, opposed the popular views of Socialism, believing rather In Individualism. He pointed out that Socialism depended for its success upon a perfectness of human nature that had never existed on earth nnd, in his opinion, never would. He mentioned tho names of the many jrreat 1111:11 who, by Uiolr individual efforts, had added to the happiness and prosperity of nations. Men required an incentive to action, and if such a state of society were brought about that all were on an equality, the (treat mainspring of ambition and action would be wauling. Mr A. Campbell followed in a capital paper which, by permission of Ihe meeting, he read. The reader held strange socialistic views, nnd believed that tho day was not far distant when stales would pass laws to impose duties upon men that were now thought revolutionary, and as interfering with the rights of properly and wenlHi. Mr John Huclinnnii opposed many of Mr Campbell's contentions, referring to Darwinism and evolution, which, in his opinion, were untenable. Mr Bell. Mr Dcbney, ])rs Moore nnd Lawry, also spoke, after which Mr Gulliver, in a masterly summing up. referred to most of tlieolijeetions'raiseil by tho speaker, nnd so concluded a most entertaining and instruc- | live debate.