SOCIALISM IN PRACTICE.

Press, Volume XLIX, Issue 14723, 21 July 1913, Page 4

SOCIALISM IN PRACTICE.

TO THE EDITOR OF "THE PBESS."

Sir,—Socialism is the declared objective of the. new Social Democratic Party, but how is it to be enforced? 1 suppose the idea is to buy out tho interests of tho present owners of property on the same principle as large estates aro bought lor settlement. I/ct us see how that would work. John Jones, we shall say, owns a factory which is worth £100.000. The- State borrows in London £100.000, pays it over to John Jones, and tho factory is thus socialised. A State Department must be created, and its officers must be paid; interest on the borrowed capital must bo made out of the industry, and sezit to the English moneylenders ; provision must-be made tor depreciation of stock, wear, and tear' of machinery, and renewal of plant. You have only to look at your railways to find that all this is correct. The way. therefore, the State-owned factory would pan out is as near as possible as follows: — JL Interest and cast of State Department, 5 per cent. ... 0,000 Wear and tear, renewal of plant, 5 per cent. ... ... 0.000 Depreciation, incidental expenses, etc., Li vev cent. ... 2,500 Salary of general manager ... bOO £13.300 I think that is below the mark, but whatever it may be, it must come out of the earnings of the workers in tho factory. Worse than that is the fact that tho natural increase of the capital must jro to London in iho shape of interest. To keen within tho mark flgan, let us say tho interest comes to 4 per cent. That means that in 25 years the State would have tent £100,000 in interest to London, and still woukP'owe tho original debt of £100,000. Add to that compound interest, remembering that £1 becomes over £3 in i>s rears, and. you will realise that the loss to the State would be enormous. Remember, this loss must come out of the earnings of tho workers. Thcro is no other means under Heaven cf providing it, so it docs not matter to the worker whether tho factory is owned by the State or a private individual. He must pay-this. Now, this money which must bo Mint to tho English money-lender every year is the natural increase of capital, and it is desirable that we should retain it in tho country so as to provide for the expansion of industry. Population is industry. Population is always increasing, and it is necessary that capital should 'iicrease proportionately, so as to provide employment for tho larger number of workers. If John Jones's factory becomes a, State-owned concern, it cannot expand, because tho natural increase is going to the English money-lender. Look at your railways, they are State-owned, but has anyone ever known ono mile of railway which has been constructed out of profits derived from the existing lines. Certainly not, for tho profits go to tho English money-lender, .and it would bo the same exactly with any State-owned concern established with money borrowed in London. Then tho position is this: —■

Ist. Buy out John Jones's factory, and work for tho English moneylender. Ho will take away his intero.st, and impoverish tho country thereby, and there can be no expansion of the industry. 2nd. Let John Jonos alone; lot him make legitimate profit. Allow him only exactly, what you must pay to the State, and you will s-eo tiiafc in 2o years his industry will bo three times as large as it is now. n three times as many workers employ.. there.

3rd. Who would you rather work for? Tlio English money-leuder, or John Jonos?

It is said that there is no community of interest between employer and employed. What good is his factory to John Jones if he cannot get men to work it. His machinery will rust, his stock will rot, and ho will die of starvation. On tho other hand, if John Jones shuts up his factory, and dismisses all hands, they, too, will die of starvation. T am making John Jones typical of capital, and his workers typical of labour, and it can be seen that "they arc dependent on each other for their very existence. If ono is injured, the other must suffer. If one dies, there is nothing to keep tho other alive. Many centuries before Christ, the plebeians of Rome went out on a general strike. A Roman senator told them that onco the hands and feet and mouth of the human body refused to work for the stomach, because it did nothing but consume tho fruit of their labour, very soon tho hands and foot and mouth discovered that without tho stomach they must die, and so they went to work again. For the purposes of my argument, I wish capital to bo regarded as the stomach, and tho workers the hands, fe«t and mouth. So the plebeians of Home understood tho allegory, and I hop© the workers of to-day are not less iutplliKcnt than the Roman workers who lived long before Christ. —Yours, etc., J. M. TWOMEY.

July 11th, 1913