New Series, VoL L J ; ,h -? $3 00 By Mail. $3 50 By Carrier. 1 50cts Additional after three Months. J gramatt TIIUR3DAY, SEPTEMBER 5,1867. tub reconstruction of LABOR. The history of 1 modern society is a history of revolution; —from the imperial rule of Romo to the social system of the half-chris tianized barbarians'of the Northern Nations, as from this in turn to the Feudal sys tem and villenage . Feudal tyranny and slavery have followed the Roman, in dyingout as social power, and as a political system it received its final coup de grace at the Revo lution, sometimes called the French. Industry has superseded Feudalism as the controlling power of society, and tho influ ence which belonged to Lord and Baron is wiolded by capitalist, director and manu facturer, well called “captains of industry." To all such changes the Church of Christ cannot be indifferent. She would ill repre sent her Founder,had she do compassion for tho miseries which caused them, and which they caused; —no hope for the future of the world as sho sees heaven and earth shaken by God’s hand, that what can be shaken, and is unworthy, may bo removed. The Church,‘to be true to herself, should as sume a more direct relation to social diffi culties and problems. Their solution lags because she fails to contribute her fair.share to the solving of them. Her great princi ples are for the well-being of all, and the balance and perspective of truth is lost when selfish hpman nature has the chance to ignore them.' Society has indeed its own great laws, but all laws work injustice in some way. It is, for instance, the law that wealth and power shall accrue to those who haveit, —“ to him that hath shall be given.” — and overy present acquisition is a means to fu ture selfish aggrandizement. This is the law of society, but she must bring tho Gos pel, must proclaim that, “Evil’s triumph is its greatest loss;” must set up a worthier standard of success, and show that this is not success, hut in the long run the most disastrous failure She must,re-adjust the balr ance by re-affirming e'ternafprinciples. Her care, in so far as she is true to herself, is to bo the patron of the weak, —the protector of the, down-trodden. To be unable to main tain one’s own place, is the best claim to her services. This office of fhe Church must, of course, bo especially exercised towards what are sometimes called “the lower*classes.” Revo lution cannot destroy sbeial power, while it may change its form and transfer its pos session. Now to long as power exists it may be abused, that is. made to subserve merely selfish purposes; and the abuse of such power is essentially tyratnny, a thing as nat ural and as common in the Industml as in the Feudal stages of society. Tb the eye of sense nothing is more absurd than to point out any ossontial connection b&tween the outrages of the Feudal baron and those of the modern capitalist;—the wrongs of the halberd and of the yard stick.' But “the end of philosophy is the intuition of unity” (Bacon), and there is undbr their formal di versity an estontial nhity. Both these tyrannies are the exercise of power, which exists for the good of all, to the detriment of tho many; both fall within the sphere of the Church’s activities, in that they are wrongs which the State cannot reach,.or only by revolution.* ’ That abuses and tyrannies as actually ex ist in modern times, as of bid—that there are Industrial as well as Feiidal tyrannies—is plain from the repeated rebellions against the modern “ captains of industry.” Strikes, lockouts, trade’s unions, and the atrocious means they sometlhies employ, all attest with what oxcessiVe friction, wear and tear, tho system of free and unlimited competition *We say "by revolution,” for,the foundations of society rest on the laws of meum and lu.um as of old oti the rights of the seignor,— to interfere with either is to subvert eithef form of society. In the case of the baron, this has,actually been done, aud he has been deprived, in large measure, of the power which he held for the cOmtn'ba weal, when it was found that the common weal could be best promoted by other means. But the'dapitalist is as truly a pub lic official as was the baron; tbe State is the source of all power, bo also is it tl\e depository of all rights, the sovran owner of all property, a right which it resuipes in "confiscation. The capitalist is but a "tenant at will,"Jan official qudadpfaditum. Th‘e State owns all by the Vaffie right by which it rules, and the possession of property is no more sacred and in alienable than is that of power. The right of taxation implies thie^ —«fche right? to take one per cent, in vahs, impjifi Ifcft rjgju hundred per cent, in kind* Th«e facts should be remem bered in connection' the confiscation question. 16july68 PHILADELPHIA, THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1867. has worked. ; We are assured, indeed/that these arise only from stupidity of the work men, who fail to see that the interests of la bor and capital are the great “law of demand and supply” governs all things to which all must submit. Men say this who laugh to scorn the idea that this identity of interests (or a much closer one) between master and slave, availed for the protection of the latter; .who rdo not- listen for an in stant the despot’s whine ;about “ a happy prosperous people,” . that only fail ito see “what is good for them;” ,wbO know that the action of the great law. of supply and demand would, if uncontrolled, sweep all our American manufactures out of the mar ket in three months, and supply their, place by the wares of Manchester, Birmingham, and Sheffield. Tho shoe pinches somewhere and no amount of logic will convince the wearer that it, does not. . The modern discontent, like the old one, has its stages of growth which are worthy of* the closest study, beginning-in each case with inarticulate and dumb revolts, like the old wars of the Jacquerie in France,- and the.aimless trades’ riots in England that.pre vailed in the earlier half of in England. “ When Adam delved and Eve span,- ■ , Who was then a gentleman?” . asked Jack Straw and tho Kentish villeins, in the year of grace 1381. Here was an uprising based on principle, enunciating a general truth which impugned the Feudal system, giving a blind, blundering voice to a hundred hitberto inarticulaterobellionS;itself growing clearer in thecourse of thoages, until it spoko, divested of its falsehood, in clarion tones, in our great Declaration: ‘Sail men are born.free and equal.” Have our modern rebels no “prophetes” or “out-speaker” of what,is boiling in their hearts? In the year of grace 1848, was proclaimed by Proudhon and the Socialist phalanx that “ la propriete e'est le vol, property is robbery,” that a solidarity of interest based upon a now and compulsory “ Socialist ” system of labor-organization, was the need of the jl9th century. . “ But Socialism is dead beyond recovery. Who are the Soeialists of the’year of grace 1867?” This, indeed, is true to the car,but not entirely true. Every great revolutionary movement has its forerunners and prema ture revolts, its blundering and one-sided prophets of the Jack Straw sort; it often seems to have died in the suppression of some immature insurrection. There were Reformers before Luther, democrats before Franklin, and because they failed, the world historic movements they represented were not suppressed. The reformation and the revolution were yet to be, and the burning of Hass and the beheading of Rienzi, did not withstand their coming. Nor did the coup d'etat answer Proudhon’s questions. In Homer the incipient democracy of Greece is represented by the ugly, bow-legged, chat tering Thersites, who is paid for his insolence with “a bloody, weal”: across his back, but Thersites ripened into Praxiteles, HSschylus, Demosthenes and Plato. What will Ther sites-Proudhon ripen into ? The outlook for the reconstruction of la bor, the readjustment of its relations to cap ital is not in the direction of socialism, though that * system has asked questions which call urgently for practical answers, — which it was itself unable to answer. There would be little security felt in a future ush ered in by a revolutionary . subversion of vested rights,—little prosperity under a sys tem which would put the active and the in dolent on the same footing, —little happiness in a social order, which would ignore the foundation-stone of all rational society, the family tie. But if the socialist cannot build he can destroy ; if he cannot create he can criticise. His denunciations of the selfish ness and greed of competition sounded very much like some New Testament texts on “ the unrighteous mammon,” “ the love of money,” &c. His book-made ideal carried one back somewhat to the days which fol lowed Pentecost, and suggested ugly com parisons. But we look, for the solution else where. What, is the relation of the Church to these great historical revolts against the so cial leaders? In the first, the Church of the middle ages bore an honorable part. She was in the main faithful in her proclama tion, that the serf was a man not a thing, a being made in the image of God, a temple of the Holy Ghost, a- brother of the lord Christ, not to be trampled'on, but to be re- verenced. Let us honor the brave priests and bishops of that age, who often sold the chalice from the altar, that they might re deem the captive ancl emancipate the slave; even while they did not.intend all the, goo.d they did. For they taught more than they meant to teach, and when the villein became a freeman, he .learnt to stand upright in the presence of the priest, as well as of the baron, and, with Luther, to refuse to let the shadow of any man fall between him and,God. The word of their testimony was as the spell that the children read from the Black Book of the old magician, not knowing l.ts full ,in tent, h,n,t they had'summoned np a “ spirit from the vasty deep," which they could not lay to'rcst again, andit destroyed them. . But what is the position of the Church in the present crisis? SVie stands, we fear, much where the Church of the, middle ages stood, bearing a testimony against the op pressor in her every 'message of the Gospel, but shrinking from its practical application, —more ready to proclaim.great principles, than to gUide men to the use of them. What is it but her message, that shakos Europe with the three magie 1 words: “Libe'rty 1 Equality! Fraternity!”? What iU Socialism but a caricature of bh : ti sbeial results she is pledged to bring about ? What is that “harmony of interests,*’ which the econo mist and’tbe stateSnrwHnok forward to as the .social - millennium-,' another .aspect of that kingdom of heaven “ which is right eousness and peace ?” What are all these rebellions of Jabor against capital, but repor titions of her own message, that, gold is less precious.than he who works in it ? What is this talk of “ the dignity and sacredness of labor,” but . a travebty Jof His words, whip taught that the towing of wheat, the spread? ing of the fisher’s net, the building of houses, tho pruning.of vines', .the baking of the bargaining of the market-place, were or dained as sigDS of the kingdom which ,He came to establish? Mi y not even this fool ish eight-hour-moveme it be at bottom a justifiable protest agaiipt the notion, that the working-man.must liye by bread alone, is a tool and hqb a, person ? . ■. Indirectly, toe, thdWii.uroh. has, ap iu» : mense interest in these questions, in seeing that these-classes are not led by blind in stincts, but should be taught the best means to their reasonable ends. The working-men are the ruling power in civilized nations. In France, whose electric influence controls the politics of Europe, the working classes are the power behind the throne, the bag of rats which the house of Bonaparte will ever keep shaking, in order that they may carry it in safety. In, England, a month has not elapsed since the three estates passed the sovran power from, the hands of the great middle class to those of the workingmen; from the classes who fill the churches and' chapels, to those who seldom darken their doors; from those who “ have a stake in the country,” to those who will vote between a scanty breakfast and an uncertain dinner It cannot be denied, that this class have been alienated from the Church by her utter want of sympathy "frith their needs, by her failure tp realize Christianity in any but its individual aspect, by her close association with the wealthy and middle classes. And yet, it was not always so. Protestantism, Puritanism, Methodism, have all in turn found their origin in this substratum, and raised large masses of the people to a higher social standing. But all those have spent their force, and now seek their converts elsewhere. Methodism, even, is of the past, and cannot take hold of the masses as it once did, nor will any mere Methodism be able to do so in the future. The man who shall be to the Secularists of Sheffield, what Wesley was to the miners of Cornwall, will see Christianity as well in its social aspect, as he saw it in its individual; will show it as the patron of fhe poor man here, as well as hereafter. It must attest its power and mission by the,miracle of social regenera tion ; and lay hold of that aspect of truth which our age mo3t especially feels the truth of, that it may lead the age into all truth. The contest between government and the subject, which broke down the Feudal sys tem, was not settled by elaborate arguments to prove an existing solidarity of interests', that the prosperity of the people was also that of the ruler, —arguments which ignore the invariable short-sightedness of greed and ambition. The solidarity, existed, but the captains of Chivalry went on doing what the captains of Industry haye been doing as well,—killing the goose that laid the golden eggs. That great issue was solved by making the governors and the governed identical in fact as well as in interest, —hyplacing the power of the,,State in the hands of the peo ple? But how shall labor and capital he, identified, unless by a new distribution 1 of property and the subversion of all our so cial arrangements? Our answer lies in one word, and that word is not Socialism, nor Agrarianism, nor universal Confiscation, but Co-operation, which may do for labor what Democracy has done for power. Men wise to know the times, see in it the little cloud that is rising, no larger than one’s hand, from the sea, bringing the showers that are to flood the parched and cracked earth. The practical principle of this system is, that the employers and the employes are the same persons, the capital of their com mon business or craft being furnished by joint-stock contributions, and the profits being equally divided among all the work ing partners. This JeaYes all questions of the hours afad remuneration of labor in the hands of those who are most concerned; de stroys the ruinous competition for employ ment which follows any slackness in trade; gives every workman that direct interest in the quality of the manufacture, which hith erto belonged only to the master; puts an end to the heart-burning that workmen feel, who think that the labors of the many are going to enrich tne few, —a feeling which, more than any actual grievance, lies at the root of their chronic discontent ;—and gives to all such'"a chance of social advancement as will go far to bridge over the chasm be tween the “ upper” and “lower classes.” It takes away those class feelings, which have rendered the workingman apathetic to the Church and dangerous to the. State; it is one step further in the development of the Christian ideal of society, nearer to the mil lennium day that saint and sage alike rejoice in looking forward to. But we must not expect, nor dread, too much from Co-operation. No social ar rangement will subvert mammon-worship, though, improved social arrangements may go far to promote fairness between man anti man. The function of the' capitalist, too, will not he destroyed, nor even for any right end impaired, though it will have lost much of its power for evil. He will have, besides his other much cherished “ free competi tions," to compete with Co-operation. He will be by the nature of things compelled to care more for the welfare of bis employes, whom he once left to the tender mercy of “ general laws.” He will realize, as never before, that “ solidarity of interest” that we hear so much of. But capital'will still' be power, and property will still be the means of gaining more; just as in the parallel so cial revolution against Feudalism, the “ gen tleman” to whom Jack Straw bore such a grudge, is not obsolete, nor powerless, though he can no longer indulge in the lux ury of a private gallows. The nobility of England will hold:their own in the New Householders' Parliament by the simple force of social prestige, although they dare not intimidate a single voter. And in the matter of labor a compromise, has already been reached, which embraces many of the advantages of Co-operation, viz: the distri bution of all profit above a certain per cent, (say 15) among the employes of the estab lishment. Co-operation is being fast naturalized in America, and in some localities has the en tire control of important branches of indus try. Its main attractions, however, in this country are not' co-operative factories but co-operative stores; not means to escape from the tyranny of capitalists so much as from the extortion of middle-men. But in England it especially flourishes, and is wel comed by statesmen and clergymen of every school as themost promising m eans forthe ele vation of the working classes, and for sweet ening the 'social atmosphere. Seven years ago 160 ; towns in Great Britain were speci fied as localities where co-operative stores or factories were already established, and always with the most gratifying results. On the Continent, as in Mulhausen in France, and elsewhere, it is equally favored, though too much mixed up with Socialistic fancies to admit of an International Co-operative Congress being allowed in Paris during the jEhfytisitmi 'season. That it is no.t -sodialism hot theideitroyer of : socialism, we are most firnilyl convinced. We bid it “ God> speed,’? assured ffchat eyery social advance, is a *^hristf^ugai^ t '’' ! 7.] ‘ ’ ' ' , Grenesee Evangelist. IsTo. 1111. f Ministers $2.50 H Miss. $2 00. 1 Addressl334 Chestnut Street. Eev. Edwin E. Hatfield, clerk of onr Gen eral Assembly, writes to the Presbyter in re gard to Dr. Hodge’s recent “ Speech from the Throne”in tli e Princeton Review: “ Dr. Hodge has" had very little practical Acquaintance with fits School brethren. My acquaintancepersonally With Hew School ministers is most extensive. , Ho other man in the churches, probably, has had so large an acquaintance with the denomination, I am familiar with the utterances of our Pres byteries, Synods, and General Assemblies, and I do not hesitate to say; that Dr. Hodge has grossly and. in excusably, slandered) us, when, after his discussion of what is meant by receiving the Standards as ‘ the, system of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures,’ he proceeds to say: ‘What we hold to be undeniably true, as a matter of histpry, is, that the Hew School Church do not require, and never have, the.adoption of that system as the condition of admission to their ministty.’ This if hews tomb. It is news to uS all. -The statement is'Utterly untrUe: I never knew, a Presbytery, Ido not believe that we have one in our connec tion, that understands the constitutiqnal question in what Dr. Hodge calls the third bense, or in any other SenSe than that 8b admi rably giVeh [elsewhere? hy'the Doctor him self '-i ') V- :... ). ' ! “I haye taken part in the licensure of nearly 300 students, and in a great number of ordinations, and I make bold to say, that, if any of these students, candidates, and li centiates, in" their examinations, had 1 called in question the distinctive doctrines'of wiliat Dr, Hodge etsa the ‘Eeformed or Calvinism tic System,’ ,an<j had insisted, ‘ that,by the system of doctrine contained in the Confes sion is meant the essential doctrines of Christianity, and nothing more,’ he Would most assuredly have b,een rejected. f .I am amazed that Dr. Hodge can bring siiqh an accusation against Ij9ss ministers and licentiates, all of' tHeth bohScieirtibus} godly men, every one of whom is ready, I doubt not, to repudiate the imputation-all of whom claim to he honest, in their inter pretation of both the Scriptures the Stahdard's of,'our Church—ah d to'^be,' tint Aribinians in any senfce’, b’ht Calvibistal True, theymayootbe oPDr. Hodge’s school of philosophy, noriis itrequired of thfem by our, ( Book, nor does Dr. Hodge claim that they must he.” - ; The Austrian Concorbait, —“ The Ultra montanea,” says.' the JLoiidmiSpectator, iOf Aug) 3n“have sustainedjßnethergieaitidefeat., Austria has been re_garded, aS their stronghold,,' but on the 26th of July, Dr. Herbstbrought forward a motion in the lleichsratb [Royal Parliament]! avowedly intended to abolish‘the Ceneordat with Rome. It authorizes civil marriage, exempts schools from the control of the priests, and esta blishes inter-confessional [that is, inter-denomina tional] equality, thus abolishing the three main principles of the Concordat. His motion was carried, in spite of Government, by .130 to 34, only the: Tyrolese, and Slovaeks dissenting, -and the Government has alreadynpened negotiations with Rome. It is distinctly understood that if the Vatican will not yield at cnee, the Concordat will cease to be law without its consent, that document being, as Dr. Herbljt puts it, an out rage on the authority of the State. The people are almost unanimous in their ab'horence Of its provisions, and even the Emperor will not now venture to defend it. A deal fell at Sadowa." “ Since that battle Venetia has. beon liberated, and the last hope of regaining power in Italy finally swept'away. ifhe Polish church has been virtually release'd from’Papal authority, the ‘clerical party has been utterly overthrown in Mexico, church property has been, sequestrated throughout Italy, and ultra-moutanism has been expelled from Hungary. The Concordat which had been oefroyed there while the Hapsburgs were absolute, required the sanetibn ; of the Diet, and with the revival of constitutional life, it silently disappears. . , ... It is,a frightful hst of misfortunes, yet we doubt if the whole together will be so bitterly felt, by Borne as this vote of the Austrian Reiehsrath. . . .' . The Aus trian Concordat which became- law Nov. 5 th, 1*855, established throughout the Empire herjideal society. From tfie Emperor ; downward every, person, institution and thing in Austria, was in trusted to her; worship was confined to her; every- grand transaction of ’life; birth, marriage, burial, could only be by hdr assent. The Bishop was the providenceofhisdiocese; : the* priest the lar of his commune; every hospital was sur rendered to, the nuns; every school to the fath ers;* every charity J to an affiliated order. So perfect was the organization that women died in the Lying-In-HospitalU of Vienna, because none bat .nuus could , attend them, and , nuns held their pruderies more important than human life. . . . 4 . The whole authority of the Church exercised unchecked for eleven years, has failed to convihije a population originally Catholic, that the Catholic idealtis:endurable/ In vain did the Government plead that i the Concordat was a treaty, and beyond the ;i range of discussion. In vain did the Tyrolese and Slovaeks, faithful servants of the Church, ignorant and innocent 'as cows, threaten' secession, and denounce * the* in fidels ■in ParHanient:’ ;.* i:L \ One German only -voted; for the ; Pppej-andlhe qnly out of spite., becaqse the rMolntions tpok the glosß off a still Stronger measure of his
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers