Page:The International Socialist Review (1900-1918), Vol. 1, Issue 1.pdf/10

10 port comes entirely from that source. They surely cannot be expected to cut themselves off from their own base of supply. I submit that there may be important principles underlying society which it is of the gravest consequence that men shall know. But so long as the study of economic science is not perfectly free, so long as a man endangers his livelihood by undertaking such study, the system responsible for such a state of affairs is subversive of man's rights. How is it with the churches? You do not need to have me tell you that the man who dares to speak fearlessly and openly the truth as he sees it will soon find himself without support. So long as a religious teacher keeps well within the limits of prescribed creed, he will not be disturbed, for no religious creed was ever written or adopted which antagonized the interests of plutocracy. And you may be sure that none will be any denomination of Christendom. How is it with the legal profession? An old lawyer living New Bedford, Mass., a graduate of Yale University and widely acquainted in this country, told me last summer that if you want to know the politics of the majority of the lawyers in any city or town, you have simply to find out the politics of the wealthiest men or corporations in that city or town. In other words, the whole duty of a lawyer is simply to interpret the law agreeably with the interests of plutocracy. A lawyer who declined to do that could not make a living.

Now, it must be clear to you that such a state of things is prejudicial to, indeed prohibitive of the moral and ethical progress of mankind. Suppose a professor of geology were to write a book and announce on its first page that he had undertaken an investigation of the story of the earth's buried life with the distinct purpose of making all the facts fit into the theory of a miraculous creation six thousand years ago. How many people would read any farther than that announcement? Of how much use would that kind of investigation be to human knowledge? Suppose that every teacher of political economy were honest and should declare to his pupils: "The things which I propose to teach in my department are such as meet the cordial approval of the men who establish and are supporting this institution." How long would such a man find people foolish enough to attend his lectures? Suppose every minister were equally honest and were to announce at the beginning of every sermon: "I have written this sermon with the distinct idea of not offending or alienating the men whose money is necessary to the maintenance of this church." How long would anybody attend such a church?

The truth is, plutocracy is making us a race of cowards and hypocrites and liars. I do not say that every teacher consciously caters to wealth. I do not say that all preachers shape their teaching with a view to retaining the financial support of the