MAINLY PERSONAL.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14355, 27 October 1908, Page 8

MAINLY PERSONAL.

Sin,—This time I have about six columns to reply to. This letter is mainly per-: sorml, and the other I send is on the main' subject. Until to-day there was nothing personal in tho controversy, but one criiie 1 descends to the contemptihl e statement that .Mr Braithwaito has not read all the books from wihinh 1»> quotes, but lias simply taken his quotations from Ceo. Allan and Sons' publication" (viz., "Tho Case Against ■Socialism "). (1) I strongly recommend my critics to read the book. (2) I wrote my two first letters before I read tho book. (3) I verified most of my quotations' from the original bcoks. (4) But it does not matter how I got my' quotations.' Tho. point is, aro they correct and did the authors' say what I said they did or. write them in the book or paper I .said they wrote them in? (s)'For instance, did the'lnternational Socialist Review say what I knew and what I stated it said, and which lias never been, and cannot be, denied—viz., "When the Socialist party shall succeed to power in municipality, State, or nation it will fall heir to the holdings of its capitalist predecessors. Every shilling's worth'of property that we can wrest'from private capitulism through public ownership will fall into djii} hands of. the Socialist, parly without a struggle upon its succession to power." (6) I have seen this quotation* in other books and papers. Nqw, my critics' dictum is that I should, have eaid there public*-'; t-ious, giving their names, said that the International" Socialist Review said so-and-so! No, I said the • original publications said it. I contend that quotations are common property so long as the original authorities aro stated. . (7) Your columns for the last 40- years testify that I never writo upon a subject until I master it. (8) You, Sir, may remember that in your columns, long before the "Case Against Socialism" or " Socialism: Its Fallacies and Dangers"' were written; in a delate with a Mr IJodds, a single-taxer and a. farmer of Mataura (I think), I exposed his fallacy that "ail wealth enmc from the land," and instanced the wealtli'of a Gainsborough picture worth £50,C00, and asked where it came from. (9) I also (as I believe) exposed Bimettalism, and tho secretary of flic Bimetallic Society generously acknowledged my originality on the question. (10) At various times up to' 30 years ago I wrote on economics, especially on Frcctrade and Protection. (11) I was one of the fhst to denounce our federating with Australia, which led to a -debate with Mr Tlios. Mackenzie, who no doubt remembers it. (12) I 'studied George's "Progress and Poverty." Wallace's" Land Nationalisation," and Bellamy's "Looking Backward " directly they appeared. Long ago I studied Karl Marx's "Capital," Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations," Mill, Fawcett, and Walker on " Political Economy," Mulhall's " Statistics," Noyes's "History of American Socialism," Green's "History of England," Rogers on "Work and Wages," and Prescott's " Conquest of Peru." Later I read Mallooh's "'Property and Progress." Marshall's " Economies," ; and Nicholson's " Political Economy." Then I read tho principal books of the Social Science series, and quite recently a few shilling books by Labour leaders, also Kari Pearson's and the famous Fabian Essays, Professor Flint's and Benjamin Kidd's solid books on Socialism, and even Blatchford's irreverent books and the Clarion. Last but not least, I road Mr H. D. Bedford's book, in which he does not allow for ability as a factor in wealth-production, and I assimilated what appeared in the press. I digested these and many others, and do not misquote them as my critics did my writings. _ In "The Case Against Socialism," only just published, is a " handbook for speakers and candidate/' It consists mainly of quotations from other writers. Those who know mo know that- I knew my subject long before this book appeared. I may have said something somebody else said, but everybody does, and within cortain limits it is permissible. How often recently have writers ami speakers said the "cost of living has gone up 30 per cent., while wages have only gone up 8 per cent," without saying who originated the statement? Who, when using the words, " put yourself in his place," thinks of who originated them ? Often, without giving authorities, it is said that England's national debt is ome £800,000,000, and New Zealand's is £66,000,000. But authorities must be given in eases of dispute. Now. I gave them. But without giving any authority whatever, one critic said "25,000,000 were, on the verge of starvation." and another said " 20.000.000 " ; but I knew bettor, and proved that Mr Charles Booth and Dr Shadwcll, who thoroughly investigated the matter.' said there were not even "12,000,000."' But, I repeat, my captions critic virtually says that. I should have said that " The Case Against Socialism" said that these gentlemen raid so and so. What ; mbecility! Moreover, I saw the figures in several hooks and papers ir, tho last five years. Other figures, too, appear in Suthc-r's " Seventeen Shots at Socialism," n Socialistic publication, without saying where they wcro derived from. With justice \ could say my critics stole their thunder from this book, and "Merrie England" an;} "Common Objections to Socialism Answered." and did what Slithers did not do-thoy doubled tho number of i.liose on the "verge of starvation"! Even the opening sentences o f my captious critic's loiter are repeated in Socialistic books. But 1 caxo not where they eomo from. Are they true? This is the onl-v point worth dismissing, and it should be discussed, without -personalities. Mj- point is that when Jatf-s. arc assimilated

they can be interpreted in any words g writer or speaker thinks fit, even (hough a.s often ami necessarily happens, word • are unwittingly used for the- same fact that others have used. If wc could call a, spa<lo ai> agricultural instrument and Ivo understood it would bo different. So, too, I remember years ago reading in several bcqks about tho iron-religious American Socialistic f ailmc3. One excellent book was P.rof. Ely's "Labour Movement, in America," and 60 en through tho wholo gamut of my critic's unmanly insinuations. I epitomise these facts mot, for vainglory but in refutation of the unjust insinuation that. lam writing on a subject T have never studied. Let my critics put forward an abler man, and I guaranteo lo turr him insido out providing ho signs his own na.nic. I am in the sere and yellow ieaf, thank God I can etill do my own thinking ami writing, and as no one impeaches tho accuracy of my quotations, my point holds good that most of the leading Socialists aim at the destruction of Christianity and of all that is best in our family Jife. I pity the man who cannot see that Christianity has ibesii', and is, a motive power for good, and that, throughout- the centuries it had very rough material to mould, and still has.—l am, etc., .TosErrr Bhaithwaitb.