Socialism and 
 The Law 
 
 The Basis and Practice 
 of Modern Legal Pro- 
 cedure and its Relation 
 to the Working Class 
 
 By George Allan England, A. M. 
 
 "Laws grind the poor and 
 
 rich men rule the lan>. " 
 
 —GOLDSMITH 
 
 Published by 
 
 THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT OF 
 THE APPEAL TO REASON 
 
 Fort Scott, Kansas 
 
 £*^£Ki 
 
m 9 ■ 
 
 Pamphlet Collection 
 Duke University Library 
 
Socialism and 
 The Law 
 
 The Basis and Practice 
 of Modern Legal Pro- 
 cedure and its Relation 
 to the Working Class 
 
 By George Allan England, A. M. 
 
 Price SSc 
 
 "Laws grind the poor and 
 rich men rule the law." 
 
 -GOLDSMITH 
 
COPYRIGHTED 
 
 SEPTEMBER, 1913 
 
 — BY— 
 
 Legal Department 
 Appeal to Reason 
 
 MONITOR BOG. A PTG. CO. 
 FORT SCOTT, KAS. 
 
SOCIALISM AND THE LAW 
 
 In approaching, from a Socialist standpoint, the con- 
 sideration of the enactment and administration of law, 
 the fundamental requisite is to disabuse our minds of 
 all conventional and long-established concepts regard- 
 ing its sanctity, inviolability, even-balanced impartial- 
 ity and universal application to every class and condi- 
 tion of mankind. The hoary maxim that "All men 
 stand equal before the law" must be immediately dis- 
 carded as useless and mischievous rubbish; and, in- 
 stead of fine-spun theories and Utopian dreams, we 
 must grapple with stern realities, cold facts and un- 
 shakable even though disconcerting conclusions. 
 
 Instead of copy-book aphorisms and pleasing though 
 inaccurate concepts, the seeker after truth must face 
 once for all the situation as it really exists today and 
 has always existed, ever since classes were formed in 
 society and laws were formulated by masters to con- 
 trol slaves — a situation thus well summed up : "Law 
 is the will of the master class, designed to keep the 
 masses in subjection," 
 
 Socialists contend, and back their contention with 
 an overwhelming mass of facts, that society is com- 
 posed of classes, always in more or less open 
 conflict, and that the law is used by the 
 master class as its most powerful weapon in 
 maintaining its rule and in checkmating any move on 
 the part of the subject class to assume control of af- 
 fairs economic or political. Whether under despotism, 
 
a limited monarchy or a republic, the same factors are 
 perpetually at work, the same forces constantly con- 
 tending. The setting of the battle varies, true, in dif- 
 ferent lands; and its accessories, so to speak, are modi- 
 fied under various forms of government; but always 
 and everywhere, at last analysis, we find the same es- 
 sential struggle going on, and always — if we observe 
 the facts of life, unbiased by preconceived notions of 
 "eternal justice" and "equal rights for all," — we see 
 the legal machinery operating in the interests of the 
 master-class. Law is a sword, its handle always in the 
 grip of Capital, its point perpetually directed toward 
 the worker's breast. 
 
 Some Cases In Point. 
 
 Enough, for the present, of generalizations. Let 
 us examine a few of the causes celebres that have re- 
 echoed through the courts of our land and found their 
 reflexes in decisions directly affecting, first or last, 
 every man, woman and child within its borders. Let 
 us analyze some of these cases, sound their motives 
 lay bare the springs of action that have controlled "the 
 gowned and black-robed puppets of bench and bar." 
 Then, perhaps, we shall possess some data to guide us 
 in deciding whether or not the Socialist interpretation 
 of law as a class-instrument be correct or otherwise. 
 
 If we consider with a critical eye the record of the 
 Supreme Court in some of its more important decisions 
 regarding the relative importance of property and hu- 
 man life, that court will not seem elevated above the 
 
ordinary level of mankind in virtue and intelligence. 
 
 It is not possible for us of the present commercial 
 times to conceive of the storm of indignation which 
 broke loose when that court (or rather John Marshall, 
 for he was the court) first declared an act of Congress 
 unconstitutional and void. Unfortunately, the decision 
 in this first case, Marbury vs. Madison, was purely 
 negative — the refusal to grant a mandamus — and there 
 was nothing for President Jefferson or Congress to re- 
 sist. But the claim had been made, by the court, of 
 the right to exercise the veto power and the precedent 
 had been established. Nothing since the Alien and 
 Sedition laws had so stirred the country. Everywhere, 
 except in monarchico-federalist circles, a great wave 
 of revulsion rolled over the country. Learned judges 
 pronounced the decision usurpation; state legislatures 
 took the matter in hand to see what could be done to 
 curb the unbridled audacity of the courts; John Ran- 
 dolph submitted an amendment to the Constitution 
 providing that, "the judges of the Supreme Court and 
 all other courts of the United States shall be removed 
 by the President on the joint address of both houses 
 of Congress." 
 
 In 1807-1808, motions were made in both branch- 
 es of Congress to amend the Constitution so that all 
 United States judges should hold office for a term of 
 years, and should be removed by the President on ad- 
 dress by two-thirds of both houses. This proposition, 
 though lost, was supported by the legislatures of Penn- 
 sylvania and Vermont, by the House of Delegates of 
 
 3 
 
Virginia and one branch of the legislature of Ten- 
 nessee. 
 
 In 1831 a final struggle was made in Congress to 
 change the tenure of federal judges from life to terms 
 of years. The attempt failed; but the measure had 61 
 supporters in the house. 
 
 Today, a corrupted press and a servile population 
 bare the head and bend the knee before this court as 
 if in the presence of the annointed of God on earth ! 
 Yet the Constitution, which defines specifically the 
 power of this court, neither grants, implies or contem- 
 plates the exercise of the tremendous power of declar- 
 ing null and void an act of Congress. 
 
 On March 6, 1857, the famous Dred Scott de- 
 cision was handed down by the Supreme Court. The 
 court held — two of the nine judges dissenting — that 
 Scott, being a slave, and hence, not a citizen, was not 
 entitled to bring an action in a United States court. 
 They went further, and held that, the territories being' 
 equally open to all people, and slaves being recognized 
 as property by the Constitution of the United States, 
 the slave-owner had the same right to take his slave 
 there and be protected in his ownership as the man 
 from the free state had to take his horse and be pro- 
 tected in his possession; that Congress could not de- 
 prive the slave owner of his right; and that, therefore, 
 the Missouri Compromise was unconstitutional and 
 void. This decision meant, in effect, thatj — contrary 
 to the spirit and purpose of the Constitution — the 
 black man had no rights that the white man was bound 
 
to respect. Here, clearly, property-rights were de- 
 fended by the highest legal tribunal in the land, at the 
 expense of human rights, in a judgment that sustained 
 every claim made by the South. The North was stun- 
 ned. The reversal of the decision was effected only 
 
 at a cost of a million lives and an incalculable hemor- 
 rhage of treasure. 
 
 Great lawyers, like Fessenden, were scathing in 
 their criticisms of the court. In a thousand pulpits 
 prayers were offered up to save the country from the 
 iniquitous decisions of the judges. The press in the 
 North was loaded with denunciations. And the peo- 
 ple of the free states, those in the mills and shops and 
 on the farms, joined in the chorus. All that was said 
 by the representative anti-slavery men was only a put- 
 ting into articulate speech and language of what they 
 felt profoundly in their minds and hearts. The pres- 
 ent generation has been educated differently, thanks to 
 the press, the pulpit, the politicians, the universities, 
 the colleges, private and public schools and current 
 popular literature. In accord with this teaching they 
 grovel on their bellies in the dust before a court like a 
 Thibetan before the Dalai Lama. 
 
 Chattel slavery is dead and forever gone; but the 
 Supreme Court, true to its instincts and traditions has 
 now become the citadel of the consolidated power of 
 capital. 
 
 On the 9th of March, 1857, Hannibal Hamlin— 
 afterwards Vice-President with Mr. Lincoln — follow- 
 ing the path blazed out by Mr. Seward, and speaking 
 of the Supreme Court, remarked as follows : 
 
"We make the laws; they interpret them; but it is 
 not for them to tell us what are the limits within which 
 we shall confine ourselves in our action. Of all des- 
 potisms upon earth, the despotism of a judiciary is 
 the worst." 
 
 The South stood by the Supreme Court in those 
 days because it was the ally of slavery; the money 
 power stands by it today, because it is the ally of 
 capital. 
 
 It was just half a century from the time Jefferson 
 began his attacks on the Supreme Court, to the revival 
 of these attacks, in the Dred Scott decision. Another 
 half a century has elapsed since that decision to the 
 present time. But outside of Socialist ranks, we hear 
 no protests today when the usurpations of the Supreme 
 Court have a wider scope and deeper import than ever 
 before. We have lost our breed of noble blood. The 
 attorneys of Standard Oil, of the radroads, and of 
 the trusts, have taken their places. Both houses of 
 Congress are as dumb as oxen. And the people ? They 
 stand as quiet and submissive as sheep under the hands 
 of their shearers. 
 
 Still Further Cases. 
 
 The class-character of our legal procedure and ex- 
 ecutive machinery was obvious in the breaking of the 
 famous A. R. U. strike in Chicago, during 1894. Not 
 only was Eugene V. Debs enjoined by Judge Grosscup 
 from exercising his constitutional right of free speech, 
 and jailed for 6 months at Woodstock for daring to de- 
 
fend that right, but Cleveland in an arbitrary and bru- 
 tal manner, over the protests of Mayor Harrison of 
 Chicago and Governor Altgeld of Illinois, threw in 
 the federal troops to break the strike. Pullman and 
 his associates were handled with kid gloves. They 
 represented Capital. 
 
 During Cleveland's second administration, a single 
 judge, Shiras, reversed the opinion of the Supreme 
 Court, and nullified the income-tax law. The "guess" 
 of this one man — a guess no better than yours or mine 
 — saved uncounted millions of dollars to the propertied 
 class in America and laid additional and grievous bur- 
 dens on some 75 millions of plain people. The 
 income tax had been imposed by the will of the people 
 as a whole, acting through Congress, the Senate and 
 the presidential signature. Shiras said "No," and the 
 collective will of America collapsed like a bursted 
 bubble. 
 
 The people of Colorado, in 1903, by a majority of 
 over 46,000 declared for the eight-hour law for labor 
 in the mines. The elected representatives of the state 
 refused to obey that mandate and enact that law. - 
 
 In Oregon, the people, by an overwhelming 
 popular vote declared for direct legislation; but 
 the state courts declared that such legislation could not 
 be written on the statute books. 
 
 The famous Moyer-Haywood case possessed prime 
 importance largely because the Supreme Court, with 
 only Justice McKenna dissenting, declared in effect that 
 kidnapping of labor leaders was constitutional, using 
 these words : 
 
"Looking first at what was alleged to have occur- 
 red in Colorado touching the arrest of the petitionee 
 and his deportation from that state, we do not per- 
 ceive that anything done there, however hastily or in- 
 considerately done, can be adjudged to be in violation 
 of the Constitution or laws of the United States. 
 
 "Even if it be true that the arrest and deportation 
 of Pettibone, Moyer and Haywood from Colorado 
 was by fraud and connivance, in which the governme.it 
 of Colorado was a party, this does not make out a 
 case of violation of the right of the appellants under 
 the constitution and laws of the United States." 
 
 To test the validity of this grave dictum, if applied 
 not to members of the working class but to a capitalist, 
 Fred D. Warren, editor of the "Appeal to Reason," 
 offered a reward of $1000 for the kidnapping of Ex- 
 Governor Taylor, of Kentucky, and his return to che 
 Kentucky authorities. Taylor was a fugitive from jus- 
 tice, hiding in Indiana, and wanted on a murder charge. 
 A standing reward of $100,000 for his return was 
 kept in force by the State of Kentucky. Despite these 
 facts, Warren was arrested and prosecuted on a charge 
 of sending incendiary, threatening and defamatory mat- 
 ter through the mails. 
 
 The Famous "Warren Case. 5 ' 
 
 One of the most celebrated test-cases ever tried in 
 America resulted. Its details would consume space 
 far beyond our present limits. Be it remembered, how- 
 ever, that after incredible delays, subterfuges and an- 
 noyances, Warren was convicted and sentenced to six 
 months in jail and to pay a fine of $1500. 
 
 8 
 
During the trial at Fort Scott, before Judge 
 Pollock, and later at the appeal in St. Paul, 
 before Judge Hook, Warren enunciated more 
 clearly than has ever elsewhere been done, the class- 
 character of the law and the courts as administered by 
 and for Capitalism. Through the columns of the "Ap- 
 peal" and by means of reprints in hundreds of other 
 papers, he was able to spread widely a true understand- 
 ing of modern legal procedure. A few quotations are 
 essential. 
 
 During the first speech he said: 
 
 "Would the Supreme Court hold to its opinion that 
 kidnapping was not a crime if the- victim were a mem- 
 ber of the Republican party and a' representative of the 
 capitalist class? 
 
 "My arrest and conviction is the first instance on 
 record where a man was prosecuted for attempting to 
 bring to the bar of justice an indicted fugitive charged 
 with the crime of murder. 
 
 "There must be some reason why I alone of the 
 thousands of men who, according to the rule of this 
 court and the opinion of the district attorney and his 
 assistant, have committed substantially the same act, 
 should be singled out and marked for prosecution. 
 
 "The reason is not hard to find. Society today is 
 divided into two classes. On the one side we find the 
 work people — men, women and children who have no 
 means of obtaining a livelihood but by their hard labor. 
 On the other hand we find a relatively small group of 
 men who own the land, and the tools which these peo- 
 ple must have access to if they are to live. It is the 
 primary if not the sole purpose of the men who own 
 
this productive property to obtain as large profits as 
 possible, while on the other hand the work people 
 strive constantly to increase their wages. This creates 
 a class conflict. 
 
 "The slave master built up a civil and political 
 system which protected his right of property in the 
 bodies of his slaves and the wealth they produced. 
 Prior to 1860, the laws enacted by Congress and by 
 most of the several states, backed by the decisions of 
 federal and state courts, had for their object the pro- 
 tection of the slave master in his right of ownership 
 of men, women and children. The man who dared 
 raise his voice in protest against the exploitation of the 
 black man was branded as a traitor to his country. If 
 he attempted to speak he was thrown into jail, and if 
 he attempted to print a newspaper voicing his senti- 
 ments his press was destroyed and he was mobbed and 
 murdered. 
 
 "What was true in the two revolutionary periods 
 which marked the disappearance of a political system 
 based on kingcraft and a political system based on chat- 
 tel slavery is true today. 
 
 "The men and the newspapers that have espoused 
 the cause of men, women and children who work in 
 the fields, factories and mines of this nation are mark- 
 ed for persecution, as were the Revolutionary and 
 Abolition editors before them. 
 
 "The courts today, as prior to 1860, are with the 
 owning and ruling class. Daily this fact is becoming 
 more apparent. One has only to refer to the long list 
 of decisions in which the interests of labor and capital 
 are opposed, to verify this statement. The black-list 
 has been legalized and the boycott outlawed. The 
 injunction has been used with telling effect in labor 
 
 10 
 
controversies to terrorize and crush the men who work, 
 while it has proved ineffective and of no avail when 
 directed against great capitalist interests. 
 
 "Our colonist forefathers, imbued with the high 
 ideals embodied in their immortal Declaration, shoul- 
 dered their guns and shot to death the divine right of 
 kings, and then the cunning enemies of democracy rais- 
 ed in its stead the Supreme Court, with its many fed- 
 eral arms reaching out into all the states of the Union. 
 
 "The Supreme Court has become in fact the reign- 
 ing monarch of the American people. No measure of 
 relief demanded by voters of this nation enacted into 
 law by their elected representatives and signed by the 
 President may become operative without its judicial 
 sanction. At the command of the lords of privilege 
 any obnoxious law is promptly declared unconstitu- 
 tional. 
 
 "The Supreme Court of the United States has to- 
 day more real power over the people than is vested in 
 any monarch of the old world. 
 
 "The late Senator Hanna boasted that the courts 
 are maintained to buttress property rights. 
 
 "President Taft in his Hot Springs (Va.) speech 
 expressed a decided opinion upon the same question in 
 referring to the inability of the poor to cope in the 
 courts with men of wealth. With expressions like 
 these from men of prominence, do you wonder that 
 there is a growing distrust on the part of the poor 
 people of this nation that the courts are against them? 
 
 "In the western district of New York, of thirty 
 cases decided in favor of injured employees twenty- 
 eight were reversed in favor of the master class by 
 the higher courts. United States District Attorney 
 Sims of Chicago was waging a vigorous fight against 
 
 11 
 
the white slave drivers, and when victory was almost 
 within his grasp his hand was paralyzed by a decision 
 of the Supreme Court, which virtually put an end to 
 the prosecution of that unspeakable infamy. There 
 are property interests involved in the wholesale de- 
 bauchery of young girls, and these property interests 
 must be safeguarded at whatever cost. As for the 
 girls, they are the daughters of the working class and 
 in point of value are not to be compared to property. 
 
 "Our modern system of jurisprudence is a survival 
 of mediaeval times, when judges presided by right of 
 ownership of lands and castles, and it will require an- 
 other political revolution similar to that of 1776 and 
 that of 1860 to abolish this bulwark of special privi- 
 lege and capitalist exploitation. 
 
 "In feudal slavery the courts sustained the feudal 
 lords, in chattel slavery they protected the slave own- 
 ers, and in wage slavery they defend the industrial 
 masters. 
 
 "Whoever protests for the sake of justice or in 
 the name of the future is an enemy of society and is 
 persecuted or put to death. 
 
 "In one of the most eloquent characterizations of 
 history Charles Sumner, tracing the march of the cen- 
 turies, pointed out that the most infamous crimes 
 against the liberty and progress of the human race 
 had been sanctioned by the so-called courts of justice. 
 
 "This case is a mere incident in the mighty strug- 
 gle of the masses for emancipation. Slowly, painfully, 
 proceeds the struggle of man against the power of 
 Mammon. The past is written in tears and blood. 
 The future is dim and unknown, but the final outcome 
 of this world-wide struggle is not in doubt. Freedom 
 will conquer slavery, truth will prevail over error, jus- 
 
 12 
 
tice will triumph over injustice, the light will vanquish 
 the darkness, and humanity, disenthralled, will rise 
 resplendent in the glory of universal brotherhood." 
 
 Warren's Second Speech. 
 
 In Warren's St. Paul speech he followed up this 
 damning arraignment of class-courts and class-rule by 
 still more specific charges. It was not Warren, but 
 capitalist legal procedure, which stood accused in the 
 dock. Said Warren: 
 
 "The question involved in this case is whether 
 there is one law for the workingman and another law 
 for the rich employer. The Supreme Court's decision 
 in the famous kidnapping conspiracy in ColoracSo and 
 the action of high government and state officials in 
 protecting a fugitive Republican politician, charged 
 with murder, lends color to my contention that there 
 is one interpretation of the law for the poor and an- 
 other for the rich. The action of the Governor 
 of New Jersey in refusing to issue requisition papers 
 for Armour, the Chicago meat packer, who was charg- 
 ed by the New Jersey prosecutors with violating the 
 anti-trust laws of that state is a convincing argument 
 that there is one law for the poor man and one for the 
 rich. 
 
 "By environment, training and economic interests, 
 the judges who compose this court are opposed to me. 
 You can no more impartially consider the questions 
 involved in this case than could the judges appointed 
 by the English king to consider impartially the ques- 
 tions which arose between that monarch and his Amer- 
 ican subjects. 
 
 13 
 
"In all controversies that arose between the master 
 and his slave prior to the rebellion of 1861, the fed- 
 eral courts made their decisions conform to the inter- 
 ests of the masters. It was from the slave owners that 
 they derived their powers and held their positions. 
 No man openly antagonistic to the slave power could 
 hold a position on the federal bench. 
 
 "An examination of the decisions of this court — 
 and your decisions are similar to those of all other 
 federal courts — wherein the interests of the working- 
 man conflict with the interests of the employer, is am- 
 ple proof of the class character of the federal judic- 
 iary. 
 
 "As a militant member of the working class I 
 frankly confess that I expect nothing from this court. 
 A court of justice, so-called, which turns away a man- 
 gled working child empty-handed, in defense of capi- 
 talist class property against working class life and limb, 
 is not apt to look with favor upon one in revolt against 
 such shocking inhumanity and the system responsible 
 for it. 
 
 "I know that this is the settled policy of this court. 
 I understand why its decisions are in the interest or 
 the employer and against the working man and work- 
 ing woman. 
 
 "You are serving those to whom you are indebted 
 for your position and responsible for your power. I 
 am simply trying to show to the working class of the 
 world, which embraces a great majority of the popu- 
 lation, the character of the federal court to which must 
 be submitted their liberties and their lives. The fed- 
 eral court under capitalist misrule is essentially capi- 
 talistic. in its sympathies, its interests and its decisions. 
 
 14 
 
"In this important work of educating the working 
 class as to the true character of the courts you are help- 
 ing me. It was the Dred Scott decision that hastened 
 the overthrow of chattel slavery, and, as history re- 
 peats itself, we may confidently expect that the de- 
 cision of the Supreme Court in the now famous kid- 
 napping conspiracy, backed by the federal court's de- 
 cisions in all other labor cases, will precipitate the 
 downfall of wage slavery. When the toilers of the 
 mill, factory, mine and farm once understand the true 
 situation, they will realize that there can be no relief 
 from judicial despotism until they use the power latent 
 in themselves to abolish the present iniquitous system, 
 based upon the legalized robbery of the nation's toil- 
 ers and producers, IN WHICH THE COURTS 
 ARE MERE CREATURES OF CAPITALIST 
 CLASS RULE AND INSTRUMENTS OF WORK- 
 ING CLASS SUBJECTION. These workingmen will 
 one day learn to choose their own' judges, and while, 
 these judges may know little of the intricacies of law 
 and the chicanery of technicality, they have an inherent 
 sense of justice and they may be depended upon to 
 serve their brothers. 
 
 "I shall consider it the proudest day of my life 
 when I enter the jail at Fort Scott, imprisoned because 
 of my defense of the poor and oppressed. You will 
 by that act increase my power a thousandfold and carry 
 my message to the toiling millions from se.a to sea. 
 Gladly will I make this small sacrifice in a cause to 
 which I would willingly give my life." 
 
 ' Without doubt, Capitalist law has never before or 
 since faced 'so damning an arraignment as this of War- 
 ren's. Mask and pretense were stripped clean away. 
 
 15 
 
The naked machinery of class-rule was exposed to the 
 eyes of the world. Goldsmith's famous verse, 
 
 "Laws grind the poor, and rich men rule the law" 
 was amply proved. And from the bench and robe 
 were plucked dignity and power which can never be 
 regained. 
 
 Additional Cases Of Class Law. 
 
 The only difficulty in the way of citing cases in 
 point is the bewildering array from which to choose. 
 Any complete list of decisions "Made in Dollardom" 
 would fill volumes. I mention a few, at random. Let 
 them serve as typical, in our consideration of "Social- 
 ism and the Law." 
 
 The massacre of the "Molly Maguires," in the 
 Pennsylvania coal fields, in 1877, when seventeen min- 
 ers were hanged by packed juries and on perjured evi- 
 dence. 
 
 The Haymarket case in Chicago, when in 1887 four 
 labor leaders, since proved innocent, were hanged by 
 similar means, their real crime having been agitation 
 in favor of the eight-hour day. 
 
 The Latimer and Homestead massacres, in 1897, 
 when Sheriff Martin and 102 deputies shot down the 
 miners wholesale, and escaped scot-free, under the pro- 
 tecting wing of capitalist law. 
 
 The innumerable and incredible brutalities and out- 
 rages practiced by courts, judges and military power 
 in the labor-wars at Cripple Creek, Col., in Idaho and 
 at Goldfield, Nev., all aided by anarchistic mobs of 
 "respectable business men" under the aegis of Law. 
 
 16 
 
The numerous peonage cases throughout the South, 
 where Law and Capital have played into each other's 
 hands to bind men into slavery and, if rebellious, to 
 torture and murder them without compunction. 
 
 The shameless cases in which Mexican, Russian 
 and other political refugees have been arrested, im- 
 prisoned and punished by our courts and, save for the 
 prompt and vigorous protests of the working class, 
 would have been returned to the clutches of their vin- 
 dictive masters. 
 
 The innumerable trust deals and steals perpetrated 
 on the American people, by and through the forms of 
 law. 
 
 The mob-rule, under legal forms, in Tampa, Fla., 
 1910, where every constitutional right of the working- 
 class was violated. 
 
 During the Cigar Makers' strike, in Tampa, a prac- 
 tical state of martial law existed. Hundreds of citi- 
 zens were sworn in as special policemen, the Labor 
 Temple of Tampa and the union hall were closed; 
 safes containing the union recordls were seized by order 
 of the court, were taken to the court house and held 
 for investigation, and two strikers were lynched. 
 
 The many legalized murders at Lawrence, Pater- 
 son and other strike centers, and, together with these, 
 the infamous sentencing of Pat Quinlan to the New 
 Jersey penitentiary, on absolutely perjured evidence. 
 
 The assassination of free speech, by court injunc- 
 tions, in dozens and scores of our cities, including San 
 Diego, Seattle, Little Falls, Fresno and Spokane. 
 
 17 
 
The setting aside of the famous "Big Fine" of 
 $29,000,000 imposed by Judge K. M. Landis on the 
 Standard Oil Company, and reversed by Judge Peter 
 S. Grosscup. 
 
 The defeat, by Judge Pollock's injunctions, of the 
 Kaw River Drainage Board's attempts to widen the 
 river channel and obviate floods costing hundreds of 
 lives and millions of dollars in aggregate small prop- 
 erties, at the expense of "made" land held by the huge 
 packing-houses at Kansas City. 
 
 The overriding, by the Supreme Court of West 
 Virginia, of the Constitutions of that state and of the 
 United States, in the interests of the mine-owners, and 
 the endless and incredible brutalities practiced on the 
 miners, by "constituted authority," contrary to law. 
 This West Virginia case, being still fresh in the public 
 eye, deserves further mention. 
 
 Class Administration of Law, With a 
 Vengeance. 
 
 The following provisions of the United States Con- 
 stitution have all been violated by officials sworn to 
 uphold that Constitution in West Virginia. 
 
 No person shall be held to answer for a capital or 
 other infamous crime unless on a presentment or indict- 
 ment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land 
 or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual ser- 
 vice, in time of war or public danger . . . nor be de- 
 prived of life, liberty or property without due process 
 of law.— Amendment V. 
 
 18 
 
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall en- 
 joy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impar- 
 tial jury of the state and district wherein the crime 
 shall have been committed. . . . Amendment VI. 
 
 The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall 
 not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or 
 invasion the public safety may require it.- — Article 1, 
 section IX, paragraph 2. 
 
 The right of the people to be secure in their per- 
 sons, house, papers, and effects, against unreasonable 
 searches and seizures, shall not be violated. . . . Amend- 
 ment IV. 
 
 . . . The right of the people to keep and bear arms 
 shall not be infringed. — Amendment XL 
 
 . . . Nor shall any state deprive any person of life, 
 liberty, or property without due process of law, nor 
 deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal 
 protection of the laws. — Amendment XIV. 
 
 Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except 
 as a Punishment for crime whereof the party shall 
 have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United 
 States, or anv place subject to their jurisdiction. — 
 Amendment XIII. 
 
 The following provisions of the Constitution of 
 West Virginia were all likewise violated, in dealing 
 with the miners, by officials sworn to uphold that con- 
 stitution: 
 
 The provisions of the constitution of the United 
 States, and of this state, are operative alike in a period 
 of war as in time of peace, and any departure there- 
 from, or violation thereof under the plea of necessity, 
 or any other plea, is subsersive of good government, 
 
 19 
 
and tends to anarchy and despotism. — Article I, sec- 
 tion 3. 
 
 The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall 
 not be suspended. No person shall be held to answer 
 for treason, felony, or other crime, not cognizable by 
 a justice, unless on presentation or indictment by a 
 grand jury. — Article III, section 4. 
 
 No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or 
 property, without due process of law, and the judg- 
 ment of his peers. — Article III, section 10. 
 
 The military shall be subordinate to the civil pow- 
 er; and no citizen, unless engaged in the military ser- 
 vice of the state, shall be tried or punished by any 
 military court, for any offense that is cognizable by the 
 civil courts of this state. — Article III, section 5. 
 
 Trials of crimes, and of misdemeanors, unless here- 
 in otherwise provided, shall be by a jury of twelve 
 men, public, without unreasonable delay, and in the 
 county where the alleged offense was committed. . . . 
 Article III, section 14. 
 
 The courts of this state shall be open, and every 
 person, for an injury done to him, in his person, prop- 
 erty or reputation, shall have remedy by due course of 
 law; and justice shall be administered without sale, de- 
 nial or delay. — Article II, section 17. 
 
 Such is a partial list of the legal malfeasances of 
 the ruling class in this one case. After all, "What's 
 the Constitution between friends?" 
 
 To such as still retain their old-fashioned respect 
 for and admiration of the Supreme Court, as a body 
 pure in motive, lofty in deliberation and impersonal 
 in decision, I now recommend a careful reading of 
 
 20 
 
Gdstave Myers' "History of the Supreme Court." 
 With which recommendation, I pass on. 
 
 Some Individual Cases. 
 
 Leaving now, though with its outlines hardly as 
 yet sketched in, the larger aspects of the case, where 
 masses of men and large properties have, in general, 
 been involved, let us examine a few of the many thou- 
 sands of cases where working-class individuals, suffer- 
 ing personal wrong and injury, have applied in vain 
 to capitalist legal machinery for redress and compen- 
 sation. I cite perhaps a thousandth of one per cent, 
 of the cases on record, all essentially alike in this, that 
 no deserving trust or capitalist ever has gone empty- 
 handed from a court of law. 
 
 Flossie May Clements was a 17-year-old girl, 
 working some time ago in the "Model Laundry" in 
 Washington, D. C, for a pittance to support herself 
 and widowed mother. Flossie worked at a mangle. 
 She fed this monstrous machine from early morning 
 till late at night, day after day, week in and week out. 
 
 One day Flossie's right hand was caught in the 
 heavy machinery. She was hurried to a hospital. The 
 doctors found that amputation was necessary. A few 
 weeks later the girl was discharged cured, but abso- 
 lutely helpless. 
 
 NOTE: — For a partial list of court decisions fav- 
 orable to Capital and against Labor, see Appendix. 
 
 21 
 
The young victim brought suit against the com- 
 pany for $20,000. 
 
 The case came to trial. When the girl was called 
 to the witness stand she was asked by her attorney to 
 exhibit her injury. She trembled, drew back the sleeve 
 from her mangled arm and fell fainting. 
 
 She was carried out of the court room. The trial 
 closed. Justice Barnard adjusted his glasses, cleared 
 his throat, and began his charge to the jury. 
 
 "The plaintiff," said the learned judge, "was fa- 
 miliar with the operation and the dangers of the man- 
 gle. According to law she assumed the risk incidental 
 to the operation of this machine, and the defendant is 
 therefore exempt from all liability. You are instruct- 
 ed to bring in a verdict for the defendant." 
 
 The jury obeyed. The Law was vindicated. And 
 Flossie? What became of her? 
 
 One thing is certain. Had that judge been a So- 
 cialist, the ancient and barbaric doctrine of "assumed 
 risk," now said to be held only in Turkey and the 
 United States, would never have been applied, and 
 justice would have been done. 
 
 Another case, also of a factory girl, this time from 
 New Jersey. Her arm was caught in the machinery 
 and torn from the socket. A jury awarded her $17,- 
 500. The corporation appealed, and the Supreme 
 Court reversed the verdict. The frightfully mutilated 
 girl was turned out, penniless and helpless, on the 
 streets. 
 
 22 
 
'On what ground did the august tribunal reverse 
 this verdict? Here it is, as given by the Philadelphia 
 Evening Telegram, Jan. 3, 1911: 
 
 "A photograph had been introduced in the trial. 
 This photograph was the picture of the plaintiff in her 
 confirmation dress, and the learned judge decided that 
 it was irrelevant. Being irrelevant, it should not have 
 been admitted, and being admitted it nullified all the 
 proceedings of the court bearing upon the negligence 
 and responsibility of the company." 
 
 Indeed, "a Daniel come to judgment!" 
 Albert M. Dawson, a brakeman on the Rock Is- 
 land, was killed by reason of a defective hand-hold on 
 a freight car. The hand-hold had been screwed into 
 rotten wood. It pulled out. Dawson fell under the 
 wheels and was cut in two. The judge in the case — 
 he traveled on a pass — instructed the jury to return a 
 verdict for the railroad and against the widow; and 
 this verdict was sustained by the higher courts. "As- 
 sumed risk," again. Ninety thousand railroad em- 
 ployees are killed or injured every year on American 
 railways. Every railroad should ask itself with all ser- 
 iousness: "Have we a little judge in our house?" 
 
 A Few More, Out Of Thousands. 
 
 The case of Mary Miller attracted wide attention. 
 In 1910 she lost her fingers, while operating dangerous 
 machinery in the plant of the St. Louis Cordage Co. 
 A jury gave her substantial damages, but this decision 
 was reversed by the U. S. Court of Appeals — though 
 just how the case ever got to that august tribunal, no- 
 body knows but the attorneys. Judge Sanborn ruled 
 
 23 
 
that the plaintiff was not entitled to damages because 
 "the danger was apparent, and the girl could have quit 
 her job." The verdict of twelve citizens had no 
 weight with this distinguished jurist. He heard "his 
 master's voice," and came to heel with a neat "assum- 
 ed risk" decision, safe, sane and strictly legal. 
 
 On Nov. 9, 1888, sixty- four miners were instantly 
 killed by an explosion in a mine at Frontenac, Kansas. 
 A large number of others were wounded. The mine 
 company was patently responsible, through having neg- 
 lected to provide the necessary safeguards. Seventy- 
 five damage-suits were entered. These were fought 
 for many years, taken to higher courts and continued 
 till the plaintiffs were worn out. The final results to 
 the miners' families were practically nil. Let two ex- 
 amples, from this case, serve for all. 
 
 James Wilson, aged 18, was killed. His father 
 sued for $10,000. A jury awarded $5,000. From 
 court to court the company carried the case, till finally 
 it was able to compromise for a sum that did not even 
 begin to cover the plaintiff's expenses. 
 
 Thomas F. Jones was injured and sued for $15,- 
 000. He was awarded $2,000. The Company de- 
 layed payment, till finally the victim died, in 1891. 
 The widow continued the fight, but the case was dis- 
 missed in 1896. The plaintiff received not a red cent. 
 Score one more victory for capitalist law administered 
 by capitalist-minded judges ! 
 
 24 
 
A Contrast — and the Reason. 
 
 Frank Lane was a miner working in the district 
 near Girard, Kansas. In 1910, while employed by the 
 Sheridan Coal Company, he sustained injuries, due to 
 defective equipment, rendering him a cripple for life. 
 The fact of judicial partiality for the master-class and 
 against the working-class having been established by 
 an almost unbroken series of thousands of cases, War- 
 ren, editor of the "Appeal," and J. I. Sheppard, a 
 Socialist attorney of- Fort Scott, Kansas, determined 
 to make this a test case. Their idea was to establish 
 a precedent which would enable them to win in other 
 cases that the "Appeal" legal defense department 
 intended to prosecute. Action was taken to secure 
 justice for this one of the six hundred thousand work- 
 ers annually killed or injured in the United States. 
 The complete story of this case, the dilatory and 
 evasive tactics of entrenched capital sheltered behind 
 class courts, cannot be told here, but after numerous 
 subterfuges and delays, the Company was forced to 
 settle for $11,000, and partial justice was done — f>o 
 far as money can ever atone for a crushed, broken, 
 paralyzed body. 
 
 The object-lesson was made clear, of wnat could 
 be accomplished by determined Socialists, on the legal 
 battle-field, in conflict with the fossilized and hide- 
 bound courts of capitalism. The corporation that 
 mutilated Lane sought to throw him headlong on the 
 junk-pile of broken and forgotten things. Mammon 
 
 25 
 
has no mercy, and the courts are Mammon's hand- 
 maids. Upon the shapeless wrecks that once were 
 men, capitalist courts solemnly placed the great seal of 
 approval, and from their imperial decree there is no 
 appeal. None, save when Socialists stand forth to 
 battle. 
 
 In the region near Girard, some 16,000 miners 
 toil. Previous to the Frank Lane case, hundreds of 
 suits were beaten by the coal companies. Now, thanks' 
 to Socialist activities, most of these cases are won by 
 the injured miners or their heirs. The same results 
 could be accomplished everywhere, if a sufficient num- 
 ber of Socialist lawyers were in the field.' 
 
 Every year, for lack of Socialist lawyers, courts 
 and judges, vast armies of industrial cripples are left 
 to their unhappy fate. There is no pension for these 
 wounded workers. 
 
 The doors of practically all our courts are closed 
 against them; the judges deaf to their appeal. 
 
 And this monstrous social crime passes for civiliza- 
 tion ! These hundreds of thousands of men, women 
 and children crushed and torn in the machinery of 
 production to feed and clothe and shelter society, are 
 themselves, in their tragic helplessness, starved to 
 death by that same society. 
 
 Our Labor-Baiting Courts. 
 
 Not only do our capitalist courts, as at present 
 constituted, form the strongest bulwark of property- 
 
 26 
 
rights as against human rights, but they aggressively 
 exceed the furthest extension of their alleged rights 
 in baiting and persecuting Labor, all for the greater 
 glory and power of Capital. Injunctions and sentences 
 for contempt are their chosen weapons, in this unequal 
 battle. And Labor, untaught, unversed, unskilled in 
 the complex minutiae of the law, lies supine beneath 
 this judicial tyranny, or, in blind fury, thrashes out to 
 right and left with violence, which — like the unavailing 
 struggles of fabled Antaeus— only serves to reduce it 
 to still further impotence. 
 
 I cite a case in point, one of thousands. In Janu- 
 ary, 1911, Judge Greeley W. Whitford sentenced six- 
 teen striking miners to jail for a year for alleged vio- 
 lation of an injunction issued by him at request of the 
 Northern Coal & Coke Company of Denver, Col. 
 These miners were not even in the jurisdiction of his 
 court. He issued the injunction, put them in jail and 
 from his decision there was no appeal. The miners 
 had violated no law and had committed no crime. 
 They were neither tried nor found guilty. The cor- 
 poration ordered this judge to jail them to break their 
 strike. Sixteen innocent workmen were accordingly 
 imprisoned for one year, without trial, by the decree of 
 a judge, issued at the command of a criminal coal cor- 
 poration. 
 
 In view of a fact like this, which is only one of an 
 infinitude of similar injunction and contempt cases that 
 might be cited, what, forsooth, becomes of our boasted 
 "equality before the law" How many plutocrats have 
 
 27 
 
been jailed for a year, for violating an injunction? 
 How many are even enjoined, at all? Let Echo an- 
 swer. 
 
 Judicial arrogance can go no further than in these 
 cases, now growing numerous, wherein the judge — - 
 making his own law — sets aside the constitutional 
 guarantee of trial by jury, cites persons for contempt, 
 tries them and sentences them, when he himself has a 
 personal interest in their conviction. The judges have 
 proclaimed "We are higher than the law or the Con- 
 stitution," and all who question it are liable to suffer 
 grievous consequences. 
 
 Supreme Arrogance of Our Bench. 
 
 Saliently now stands forth the fact, long recognized 
 by Socialists and at last coming to be admitted even 
 by Old Party men, that in no civilized country on earth 
 does any such arbitrary and dictatorial power exist as 
 that actually assumed and exercised by our courts. The 
 President of the United States, himself, is powerless 
 before the majority of his own appointees, the Su- 
 preme Justices; while Congress is but a body of child- 
 ren who may play at "law-making" but who cannot go 
 beyond the parental will of our nine Czars, with long 
 gowns to dignify their rule. 
 
 Informed persons know that the federal judiciary', 
 more, if possible, than the Senate, is owned by the rul- 
 ing class and exists solely to do its bidding. Any law 
 passed by Congress, antagonistic to the interests of 
 the plutocrats, is immediately held by the Supreme 
 
 28 
 
Court as unconstitutional. Any strike that bids fair 
 to win victory is crushed by an injunction. Any meas- 
 ure or movement looking toward the betterment of the 
 masses at the expense of the classes invariably finds its 
 death at the hands of a federal judge. 
 
 Such judges, appointed by the President for life, 
 can be removed only by death, resignation or impeach- 
 ment. Within their sphere they are absolute ; in recent 
 years they have usurped powers and assumed a juris- 
 diction to which they are manifestly not entitled. They 
 stand higher than all our law-making bodies, for they 
 can declare unconstitutional or deny the laws after 
 they are made. Once the Supreme Court has spoken, 
 no more can be said. There can be no appeal from n 
 Supreme Court decision. Thus the control of the Su- 
 preme Court by the plutocracy makes the plutocrats 
 the rulers of our nation. The federal judiciary pos- 
 sesses a power not exceeded by that of any monarch 
 on earth ; and this power is used exclusively to further 
 the interests of the rich and to degrade to greater 
 depths the rank and file of the working class. 
 
 As men are formed and moulded by their environ- 
 ment, so that every occupation produces specialized 
 types of bodily and mental modification — such as "min- 
 er's lung," "housemaid's knee," "clergyman's 
 voice," "writer's cramp" and the like, — we now know 
 and recognize a special type of intellect well-described 
 as "lawyer's brain" or "judge's mind." This legal 
 and judicial intellect has no connection with the reali- 
 ties or facts of life, the problems of humanity or such 
 
 29 
 
trivialities as right and justice. It feeds exclusively 
 on codes, precedents, objections, exceptions, writs of 
 error, stays, habeas Corpuses, mandamuses, injunctions 
 and'-.'nice sharp quillets of the law." It was once most 
 beautifully summed up by Ex-President Taft in his re- 
 mark: "I love the judges; I love the courts. They 
 are my ideal on earth, and typify what we shall meet 
 afterward in heaven under a just God." Speech at Po- 
 catello, Ida., Oct. 6, 191 1 - He further voiced this sub- 
 lime mental attitude in his speech at the Waldorf-As- 
 toria, January 28, 1912, when he said: "In the effort 
 to make the judiciary responsible to the whim of the 
 people, I see destruction. The conservative element 
 of the nation must eventually get together to prevent 
 a movement that would make the courts the creatures 
 of popular will, and might make the decision in every 
 case not in accordance with the law but in accordance 
 with what the majority of the people thought the law 
 should be." Comment is superfluous. 
 
 I suggest the remedy proposed by Jefferson. Let 
 Socialists operate for a joint Congressional resolution 
 declaring that no court has any jurisdiction to declare 
 an act of Congress or State Legislature unconstitution- 
 al and void on pain of impeachment, conviction and 
 removal from office. 
 
 A Few Germane Examples of Common- 
 sense vs. Legal Sense. 
 
 Earlier in this article I have already cited many 
 instances to bear out the contention of class rule by 
 
 30 
 
class courts. Nor are others lacking! They press up- 
 on our attention from every side. 
 
 ,-. The ease with which the United, States Steel Cor- 
 poration, in 1910, was enabled through the connivance 
 of President Roosevelt and Attorney General Bona- 
 part to absorb, the Tennessee Coal and Iron Co. con- 
 stituting a steal of over nine hundred million dollars, 
 illustrates the facility with which property rights can 
 work their will in this country. 
 
 When the American Tobacco Co., in and about 
 1907, formed a combination to lower beyond the sub- 
 sistance point the purchasing price of tobacco, and the 
 farmers united to pool their crops in an endeavor to 
 force prices to a living standard, all the powers of law, 
 courts and injunctions, backed by military force, were 
 called out against the working class. 
 
 The famous Standard Oil case, when taken to the 
 Supreme Court, resulted in the most amazing legal de- 
 velopment of all — the famous, or rather, infamous, 
 promulgation of the doctrine that the Court itself can, 
 by interpolating words into the written law, modify 
 that law, thereby actively assuming legislative func- 
 tions. 
 
 Justice Harlan in a dissenting opinion, May 15, 
 1911, said: 
 
 "If I have not misapprehended the opinion, the 
 court has not only read into the act of Congress words 
 which were not to be found there, but has thereby done 
 that which it adjudged in 1896 and in 1898, could not 
 be done without violating the Constitution. 
 
 31 
 
"But now the court, in accordance with what it 
 denominates 'the rule of reason,' in effect inserts in 
 the act the word 'undue,' and makes Congress say 
 what it d*id not say, what it plainly did not intend to 
 say and what since the passage of the act it has ex- 
 plicitely refused to say. 
 
 "It has steadily refused to amend the act so as to 
 allow a restraint of interstate commerce that was reas- 
 onable or due. In short, the court now by judicial 
 legislation in effect amends an act of Congress relating 
 to a subject over which that department of the govern- 
 ment has exclusive cognizance." 
 
 He still further said, in effect: 
 
 "Labor comes here and asks you to put something 
 into the Sherman anti-trust law that Congress did not 
 put in. Organized dbllars speak for human greed. 
 You grant the petition and upon the same day, almost 
 in the same breath, you deny the identical request of 
 labor. You have made the judge your legislator, and 
 the legislator is against men but in favor of money." 
 
 Federal Courts! — Department of Justice, forsooth ! 
 Justice! "Most excellent fooling!" Every one of the 
 judges on the federal bench has been appointed 
 through the influence of corporate wealth. Nearly all 
 of them were previously in the service of the trusts 
 and corporations as lawyers, and were placed upon the 
 bench for no other reason than that they could render 
 their masters more efficient service in that capacity. 
 Every man of intellect knows and admits this fact. The 
 reverence most people entertain for our capitalist 
 courts is sadly out of place among a so-called free peo- 
 ple. Such reverence is affected by the master-class for 
 
 32 
 
prudential reasons, while upon the part of the masses 
 it is born of ignorance concerning the judges and what 
 is going on behind the scenes. The fictitious solemnity 
 and dignity of the judges deceive no Socialist, for he 
 can penetrate the mask. 
 
 Says Allan L. Benson, in "Pearson's" for Decem- 
 ber, 1911: 
 
 "Federal judges make our laws, in that they write 
 all of them; in that they judge all of them after Con- 
 gress has written them. No law that is brought into 
 court can be administered until the federal judges have 
 passed upon it, if any interested party chooses to have 
 it so passed upon; until they have read words in or 
 words out, as they like. Perhaps the federal judges 
 kill it by declaring it unconstitutional. 
 
 "This is not rule by the people. It is rule by the 
 judges. How can rule by the people be established if 
 judges who are above the people are at liberty to do 
 with the law as they please? This is a crucial ques- 
 tion. Either we believe in rule by the people, or we 
 do not. If we believe in rule by the people, we do not 
 believe in rule by judges. And, if we do not believe 
 in rule by judges we do not believe in an 'independent 
 judiciary.' " 
 
 Said the "Appeal," in its issue for March 9, 1912: 
 "It is in the federal court that the workingman is 
 always beaten and the corporation always victorious. 
 The one greatest obstruction in the path of the na- 
 tion's progress is the federal court. It is the last re- 
 maining bulwark of decadent Capitalism. . . . The 
 American people, whether they will or not, will sooner 
 or later be compelled to grapple with it . . . This auto- 
 cratic, irresponsible institution, whose judges are nam- 
 
 33 
 
ed by corporate wealth with a life-tenure of office, is 
 beyond and above the reach of the people ... is the 
 very essence of despotism." 
 
 Implacably opposed to despotism in any form, and 
 fully aware of the truth of the dictum that the law is 
 a net that catches only the little fish, while the big 
 break through, Socialists have given considerable atten- 
 tion to this form of tyranny. They have exposed not 
 t only the character of the law and the courts as a whole, 
 but that, also, of the individuals who, graced by the 
 black robe, are commonly supposed to belong to a su- 
 perior class of beings, far removed from the contam- 
 inating touch of criticism. Judges, at their touch, have 
 crumbled to common clay. The "Appeal to Reason," 
 alone, has unseated several from the federal bench. 
 
 As a sequel to its judicial housecleaning, the "Ap- 
 peal" initiated a movement for the popular elec- 
 tion and recall of the judiciary, which has since been 
 written into the Socialist platform and become widely 
 popular. "Socialism and the Law" is noi, after all, so 
 abstract a question as at first blush might appear. 
 
 On the 22nd of October, 1910, the "Appeal," un- 
 der the head of "The Treacherous Record of Con- 
 gress Exposed!," printed a complete analysis by Louis 
 Kopelin, of the action of all Congressmen then in ses- 
 sion, on the following issues: Eight Hour Law, Dick 
 Military Law, Anti-Injunction Law, Sixteen hour day 
 in railroad service, Child Labor Laws, Employer's 
 Liability bill and several others affecting Labor. The 
 vote of each Congressman on each of these several 
 
 34 
 
questions was printed, and by an overwhelming major- 
 ity the elected law makers of the people, theoretically 
 their servants and representatives, were proved to have 
 consistently worked and voted against the interests of 
 their constituents. 
 
 For many years this paper has kept and published 
 a record of the current doings of American courts, un- 
 der the heading "Class Courts at Work." It has re- 
 corded thousands of cases of glaring injustice to the 
 working class. This record is obviously too long to 
 quote; but to one who, like myself, has studied it, it 
 proves beyond the peradventure of a doubt the Social- 
 ist contention that our courts are maintained and "jus- 
 tice" administered solely in the interests and for the 
 benefit of the ruling class. I invite all doubting Thom- 
 ases to obtain and study this record, and then to affirm, 
 if they can, that justice is free, impartial and untram- 
 meled in this glorious land of ours. 
 
 Says W. J. Ghent, in a recent issue of the "Sur- 
 vey*' : 
 
 "The 'Appeal' has kept up an energetic and force- 
 ful campaign against the judiciary and has permanent- 
 ly singed many judicial reputations. It has started a 
 movement which cannot help but grow. The conduct 
 of the judiciary in so many instances these last ten 
 years has provided all the necessary material." 
 
 Waning Divinity of the Bench. 
 
 As a result of all this irreverent exposure and 
 analysis, the awful majesty of our courts and judges, 
 
 3S 
 
like unto that "divinity which doth hedge a king," is 
 fast losing ground in America. The strings have been 
 exposed, the guiding hand of Capital laid bare, and the 
 puppet-dance of the judicial marionettes too clearly 
 shown. Where none before dared criticise, now many 
 carp and jibe; and the old-time warnings of Jefferson 
 are once more becoming popular. With pleasure I 
 quote these original admonitions of the "Father of 
 Democracy," and follow his sage opinions with others 
 which, now that Socialists have blazed the trail and 
 have braved the shock of battle, are spoken less with 
 courage than with a due appreciation of the trend of 
 events. 
 
 Said Jefferson, in various public utterances and let- 
 ters to his friends : 
 
 "You seem to consider the judges as the ultimate 
 arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very danger- 
 ous doctrine, indeed, and one which would place us 
 under the despotism of oligarchy. The Constitution 
 has erected no such tribunal, knowing that, to what- 
 ever hands confided, with the corruption of time and 
 party, its members would become despots. 
 
 "They have, with others, the same passions for 
 party, for power, and the privileges of their corps. 
 Their maxim is : 'It is the business of a good judge to 
 extend his jurisdiction;' and their power is the more 
 dangerous, as they are in office for life, and not respon- 
 sible, as the other functionaries are, to elective control. 
 
 "The great object of my fear is the federal judic- 
 iary. That body, like gravity, ever acting with noise- 
 less foot and unalarming advance, gaining ground step 
 by step, and holding what it gains, is engulfing insid- 
 iously the specidl governments into the jaws of that 
 which feeds them. 
 
 36 
 
"The judiciary of the United States is a subtle 
 corps of sappers and miners, constantly working un- 
 derground to undermine the foundations of our con- 
 federated fabric. An opinion is huddled up in con- 
 clave, perhaps by a majority of one, delivered as if 
 unanimous and with the silent acquiescence of lazy and 
 timid associates, by a crafty chief justice (Marshall) 
 who sophisticates the law to his mind by the turn of 
 his own reasoning. 
 
 "And! it is unfortunate that federalism is still pre- 
 dominant in our judiciary department, which is conse- 
 quently in opposition to the legislative and executive 
 branches and is often able to baffle their measures. 
 
 "I deem it indispensable to the continuation of this 
 government that they (the judges) should be subjected 
 to some practical and impartial control. 
 
 "No veto power, ancient or modern, ever existed 
 so formidable as this American irresponsible judicial 
 veto/' 
 
 All this, long decades before the first injunction 
 had been issued, the first trust formed, the first great 
 labor war fought, the class struggle became apparent 
 in America. Had Jefferson lived today, what, indeed, 
 would he have said? I venture this, that no utterance 
 of the Socialist would have excelled him in denuncia- 
 tion, nor any cry for the overthrow of our despotic 
 legal system been more bitter. 
 
 If we look upon the partisan vote of the Supreme 
 Court in the Tilden-Hayes presidential contest; at the 
 appointment of two attorneys of the Pennsylvania 
 Railroad Co., to that bench, to give the Greenback 
 Decision in favor of the railroad companies; at the ma- 
 
 37 
 
jor'ity of one which reversed the will of the people in 
 the Income Tax law; at the same power of one man 
 which set aside null and void the Employer's Liability 
 Act; at their restraining injunctions in labor cases, 
 which every lawyer knows are outrageous violations 
 of. all precedent and existing law, and at innumerable 
 other decisions, and all in favor of Mammon and 
 against man, we must concur in his opinion. Jeffer- 
 son's viewpoint, in the past, exactly coincidedl, in this' 
 respect, with that of the Socialists today. 
 
 The Socialist platform declares, in one of its im- 
 portant planks, for "the abolition of the power usurp- 
 ed by the Supreme Court of the United States to pass 
 upon the constitutionality of legislation enacted by Con- 
 gress." It also declares for the abolition of all federal 
 courts inferior to the Supreme Court. 
 
 Leaving the Socialist contention for a moment to 
 one side, consider now some non-Socialist testimony. 
 C. P. Connolly says, in a recent number of "Every- 
 body's Magazine" : 
 
 "The courts have been packed in order to render 
 decisions favorable to certain corporations. Judicial 
 opinions of our highest courts have been written in the 
 offices of the legal department of railroads and other 
 corporations. Corrupt federal judges use their power 
 to loot prosperous concerns to the financial advantage 
 of judicial rings. Many judges feel themselves high 
 priests, and sincerely believe that all criticism of courts 
 is unholy and heretical. Many are political henchmen 
 with whom public morals are a cynical jest. They have 
 pared and twisted the law for the protection of a fav- 
 
 38 
 
ored few. This corruption of our courts pevdarss ev- 
 ery section of the country. It is becoming more and 
 more difficult for the poor man to get a decision against 
 a corporation. The influence of corporation lawyers 
 over courts has demoralized the legal profession. Cor- 
 rupt decisions have crept into the law and become part 
 of it, and in some communities have poisoned the en- 
 tire judicial system." 
 
 The San Francisco Call, September 13, 1909, thus 
 unburdened itself: 
 
 "Down South, the 'Atlanta Constitution' and the 
 'New Orleans Times-Democrat' have been holding a 
 sort of symposium of indignation and reproof concern- 
 ing the strange quibblings of the ingenious Judge 
 Gantt, of Missouri, who has made himself a figure of 
 national derision by reversing verdicts of criminal con- 
 victions because of the missing of the in one case and 
 a superfluous e in another. It is not, perhaps, imperti- 
 nent to remark that these reversals came opportunely 
 to the rescue of Missouri bribe-givers, who, but for 
 the timely interposition of a 'higher up' power, would 
 have been wearing stripes by this time." 
 
 And thus, the staid, slow-moving "Outlook" : 
 
 "It will be conceded as a general proposition that 
 lawyers do not reach the bench by assiduous study, high 
 legal accomplishment and professional training. . Po- 
 litical organizations have much more to do with their 
 ad/vancement than personal merit. The spectacle of 
 the elevation to the judgeship of a lawyer known and 
 appreciated by the bar is a rare one . . . In the main, 
 the bench is below the average." 
 
 The essence of law was thus brilliantly summed up 
 by Carl Snyder in a recent article in "Collier s" : > 
 
 "Do the judges know the law? Answer: The law 
 
 • 39 
 
is what they think and they seldom think alike. Do 
 the courts make the law? Answer: From the very 
 beginning of the republic it has simply been a long 
 struggle against usurpation by the courts of rights 
 which they never possessed and never were intended 
 to have." 
 
 The Morale Of Capitalist Lawyers. 
 
 Such being the case — and not even the most hide- 
 bond reactionary can deny its essential truth — the So- 
 cialist necessarily views the morale of Capitalist courts 
 and lawyers, and the codes of law as now generally 
 administered, in a most unfavorable light. To him, 
 one of the most desirable features of Socialism will be 
 the purification of those codes and the lustration of 
 the legal corps. He believes in free justice for all, in 
 an orderly, legal and reasonable transformation of the 
 present competitive state into the future co-operative 
 state; and to him, therefore, the present weltering 
 chaos of old, obsolete, contradictory, conflicting laws, 
 for the most part inane and stupidly reactionary in 
 their hampering clutch on the progress of humanity, 
 becomes a thing despicable, and void of dignity or rea- 
 son. He urgently demands its abolition in favor of a 
 sane, simple, concise and reasonable code. 
 
 He sees the legal profession as it really is, an es- 
 sentially dishonest, truckling, greedy struggle, a hair- 
 splitting Tweedledum-and-Tweedledee conflict over 
 property-rights, in which human rights are trampled' 
 under foot and lost sight of. He sees the modern law- 
 
 40 
 
yer actually training himself to respect this travesty of 
 democracy and right. He well knows that the average 
 capitalist-minded lawyer is looking forward to the time 
 when he himself may wield the autocratic sceptre of 
 judgeship. 
 
 Such a lawyer, of the old school of things, learns 
 to bow to precedent and to legal tyranny. He buries 
 his head in the musty lore of legal practice. He lives 
 in the past rather than in the present. He searches 
 the hoary volumes of ancient decisions for justification 
 of his clients, and he twists and turns facts to fit the 
 obsolete conditions of forgotten generations. He sells 
 himself for a fee. He prostitutes himself to his client 
 with all the abandon of a courtesan, and his moral and 
 intellectual integrity becomes that of the street. 
 
 No man can thus sell himself to Mammon without 
 suffering moral and intellectual decay. He is seldom 
 if ever revolutionary. True to his training, he must 
 follow his dusty precedents. No capitalist-minded law- 
 yer has ever led a great movement. Watch him in a 
 convention ; how he twists and turns the parliamentary 
 procedure, how he lays traps for the innocent and un- 
 skilled delegates. Hear the cunning phrases that he in- 
 serts in his resolutions, phrases that seem innocent, but 
 which are saturated with his poisoned art. 
 
 If the lawyers of ancient days resembled those of 
 this twentieth century, no wonder Christ cried out, in 
 anger: "Woe unto you also, ye lawyers; for ye lade 
 men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye your- 
 selves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers." 
 
 41 
 
The Approaching Change. 
 
 Socialists well know that this unjust, chaotic and 
 criminal system of legal maladministration cannot much 
 longer endure. They understand, with a clarity of 
 vision not to be deceived by any specious argument, 
 that the impending social transformation will involve 
 a like, even a greater, metamorphosis in the field of 
 law. It follows that they now eagerly invite the law- 
 yer to a study of Socialist principles, and offer him in 
 their ranks an unbounded field of endeavor. 
 
 For Socialist lawyers are today urgently needed; 
 and as time passes, will be still more essential to the 
 Great Change. This corps of workers is absolutely 
 indispensable to the Socialist army, if victory is to be 
 achieved and held. "The time is fast approaching 
 when Socialists will be called upon to make and ad- 
 minister laws. We shall have to change our judiciary 
 system, and deal with our legal machinery. Who is 
 going to do this work? Shall we leave this to the old- 
 school lawyers? The class-conscious Socialist jealously 
 guards the integrity of the movement, and has a nerv- 
 ous eye on the entrance to our ranks of the merchant 
 and the farmer. But in his guardianship he has wholly 
 overlooked the most dangerous product of the capital- 
 ist system — the lawyer. Who was it that intermingled 
 the warp of monarchy with the woof of democracy ; .n 
 our federal constitution? The lawyer. Who has been 
 the conservative factor in all attempts at corralling the 
 capitalist class? The lawyer. Whose hands thrust 
 
 42 
 
the knife into the vitals of the People's Party? The 
 lawyer. 
 
 Why is it thus? Because the legal mind is moulded 
 by legal procedure, and is wholly devoid of innate 
 human justice. Whence came our law? It is of two 
 kinds, statutory and common. Statutory law is the pro- 
 duct of legislation, and as our legislators for 120 years 
 have been controlled by the capitalist class, the statu- 
 tory law has been made for the protection and promo- 
 tion of the interests of that class. The common law, 
 which makes up the bulk of our practice, is the product 
 of court decisions, which become precedents for subse- 
 quent courts to follow. If courts adhered strictly to 
 precedent, their decisions might be governed by prac- 
 tices 200 years old, and thus modern capitalism might 
 often be embarrassed; but as there is no hard and fast 
 rule requiring such procedure, judges may follow pre- 
 cedent or not, as they choose. The capitalist class, 
 therefore, is always sure of a favorable decision of 
 the court, providing the court is chosen by the capital- 
 ist class, which is now everywhere the case. And it is 
 precisely the court that rules the land. For legisla- 
 tures may pass laws, but as we have already adequately 
 shown, the courts decide whether or not such laws are 
 constitutional and shall stand. 
 
 It follows that we need and urgently must have, 
 trained in our own ranks and fully class-conscious, men 
 skilled in legal procedure, to combat this evil influence, 
 to engineer the mighty, yet delicate, transformation; to 
 
 43 
 
scout our advance, checkmate the enemy's moves, and 
 blaze our trail through the dense jungles of property- 
 made law. Unless we know and understand the laws 
 as they exist, we are not and shall not be able to take- 
 successful charge of the offices we shall soon be called 
 upon to occupy. On our ticket, competent men are 
 nominated for all offices save those requiring a know- 
 ledge of legal technique. Such nominations must either 
 be left vacant, or men must be put up who make the 
 ticket a jest, because the electorate well knows the nom- 
 inees lack the requisite knowledge. 
 
 All these disabilities must be overcome before we 
 can hope to be taken seriously as a political party. We 
 cannot succeed as we should, so long as we must de- 
 pend upon capitalist bench and bar for a construction 
 of the law. Under such circumstances, the master- 
 class is fighting with machine guns, while we are armed 
 with clubs and javeline. Lacking our own law-corps, 
 we enter battle with bound hands. 
 
 The members of the working class, arousing as 
 they are from sea to sea, must themselves become the 
 guardians not only of their party, but of the coming 
 state. Our legal machinery cannot be mended; it must 
 be thrown on the junk-pile, along with the entire capi- 
 talist system. 
 
 In the coming Socialist state, the people will make 
 the laws, and once madie, they will stand until the ma- 
 jority repeals them and makes others in their stead. 
 
 Socialists must fight the battle, and fight it hard 
 and square. They must realize, once for all, that the 
 
 44 
 
master-class is determined to hold its ground by all 
 means, fair or foul, legal or illegal; and in the ap- 
 proaching battle, they must be prepared to meet vio- 
 lence with law, illegality with legality, fraud with ex- 
 posure, and anarchy with order. 
 
 Some may question the truth of our position; but 
 I affirm, and shall offer proofs, that Capitalism today 
 neither respects its own laws nor — if threatened^- 
 obeys them. Its reverence for law is the merest sim- 
 ulacrum. At all hazards it is bound to rule; by law, 
 if possible, if not, then by force. Prod the beast, and 
 in its rage it tears to shreds the fabric of the very law 
 under which it seeks to lie sheltered. 
 
 Every free-speech and free-press fight, every illegal 
 jailing of editors and publishers of Socialist or labor 
 papers, every "seditious libel" case, every capitalist de- 
 portation of wojrkers, every military "Cossack" or 
 mine-guard outrage, every "bull-pen" abomination, ev- 
 ery illegal sentence, every judicial murder, every polit- 
 ical refugee case, every act of mob-violence on the part 
 of the mastersi — and these are legion — every disfran- 
 chisement, every petty theft of the workers' miserable 
 property, every drop of proletarian blood shed on the 
 industrial field or in rebellion against the Hell of capi- 
 talist exploitation, calls for instant action on the part 
 of Socialist lawyers. Every threat, every anarchistic 
 utterance on the part of Respectability calls for action, 
 and at once, and with terrible urgency ! 
 
 The plutocracy begins to perceive something of 
 the trend of events, and calls on Congress to enact a 
 
 45 
 
Dick Military bill, providing that every citizen between 
 1 8 and 45 may be called to arms and must respond, on 
 pain of death. Congress compliantly obeys. Or, 
 alarmed at the rapid spread of the Socialist press, it 
 tries to pass a Penrose bill, providing that: 
 
 "When any issue of any periodical has been de- 
 clared non-mailable by the post office department, the 
 periodical may be declared! non-mailable and excluded 
 from second-class mail privileges at the direction of 
 the postmaster general." 
 
 This neat press-muzzier fails to carry only because 
 the Socialists take up the gage of battle and raise so 
 threatening a storm-cloud that the alarmed "represen- 
 tatives of the people" run to cover. 
 
 An Otis feels his power slipping from him. 
 Through his infamous "Times" (Nov. 2, 1911), he 
 threatens: "And soon — it has begun to happen al- 
 ready — the plain citizens of the country will form a 
 combine. Its object will be the suppression of sedition 
 and anarchy in the persons of the professional agitat- 
 ors. Theirs will be a big, powerful, effective but very 
 unostentatious revolt. It will work quickly, surely, 
 silently. . The first thing the plain citizen combine will 
 accomplish will be the quiet removal of these gentle- 
 men. They won't be blown up; they will just quietly 
 disappear from human ken. There will be a little in- 
 quiry at first, but it will die doWn ever so quickly. . . . 
 With the itch removed!, the great disease of unrest will 
 soon be cured, and the world will settle down for an- 
 other half-century." ;. 
 
 The New York "Journal of Commerce," the 
 mouthpiece, of the largest capitalist interests in the 
 country, sees the handwriting on the wall, and. with 
 
 46 
 
utter disregard! of existing law, urges a speedy move 
 to disfranchise the working-class. The dike must be 
 raised, forsooth, lest the floods of democracy invade 
 the rich fields of special privilege. Well the masters 
 know their last bulwark and citadel, the law, the courts, 
 the judges ! 
 
 Said the Journal, March 16, 1907: 
 
 "To guard against an eventuality, we should enact 
 preventive laws before the power to do so has passed 
 out of our hands. We should make it impossible to 
 destroy the constitutional safeguards thrown around 
 property-holders. If the Constitution could be so 
 amended that its provisions relating to the right of the 
 owner to his property could not be changed except by 
 the vote of nine-tenths of all qualified electors, and if 
 at the same time the expropriation laws were well de- 
 fined and limited and the taxing power placed under 
 reasonable restrictions, we should feel assured that 
 we were reasonably well defended against the on- 
 slaughts of Socialism." 
 
 Less judicial in tone, yet in essence meaning the 
 same thing, the Goldfield Gossip said, in January, 
 1908, at the time of the strike: 
 
 "It would have been better, perhaps, to have taken 
 these men (union men) and hanged them as a warning 
 to labor to content itself with talking, hereafter, and 
 avoid action. ... A cheaper and more satisfactory 
 method of dealing with this labor trouble in Goldfield 
 . . . would have been to have taken half a dozen of the 
 Socialist leaders in the miners' union and! hanged them 
 all to telegraph poles. 
 
 "Speaking dispassionately and without animus, it 
 seems clear to us after many months of reflection that 
 you couldn't make a mistake in hanging a Socialist. He 
 is always better dead Always hang a Socialist, 
 
 47 
 
not because he is a deep thinker, but because he is a 
 bad actor." 
 
 Anarchy, cruelty and vice inconceivable, under the 
 guise and mask of law, exist in a federal penitentiary. 
 A Socialist editor and a Socialist lawyer take the matter 
 in hand!, turn on the light, force a government investi- 
 gation, and effectually cleanse the Augean stables. The 
 Leavenworth exposure, the retirement of Warden Mc- 
 Laughry and the dismissal of Deputy Lemon are all 
 matters of easily-accessible record. 
 
 To save myself from any charge of having exag- 
 gerated the Capitalist viewpoint and its inherent law- 
 lessness, if property rights be threatened, and to point 
 out still more strongly the urgent necessity of a well- 
 trained Socialist legal corps to meet that lawlessness, I 
 quote a few choice gems from capitalist literature, 
 with book, chapter and verse : 
 
 "Quitting work is criminal." — Taft, circuit judge, 
 54 Fed. Rep. 730, 1893. 
 
 "The people are not the source of power." Ency- 
 cical. — Pope Pius IX. 
 
 "Undesirable citizens. Mover, Haywood, Petti- 
 bone." — Theodore Roosevelt. 
 
 "What's the constitution between friends?" — Tim- 
 othy Campbell of Tammany Hall. 
 
 "To hell with the people ! What do I care for the 
 people?" — Governor Gooding, Idaho. 
 
 "The Catholic church and the courts are the bul- 
 warks between the mob and property." — Mark Hanna. 
 
 "Habeas corpus be damned! We'll give them post- 
 mortems instead!" — Adj. Gen. Sherman Bell of Colo- 
 rado militia. 
 
 What should a man do who is hungry and out of 
 work? "God knows, I don't." — Wm. H. Taft, Coop- 
 er Union speech. 
 
 48 
 
"The damn fools don't know what is good for 
 them." — J. Pierpont Morgan, speaking of the striking 
 steel workers in September, 1901. 
 
 "The supreme court stands next to divine author- 
 ity as the rule of justice and right." — J. P. Morgan's 
 personal newspaper, the Sun. 
 
 "Men who object to what they style 'government 
 by injunction' are not in sympathy with men of good 
 minds and good civic morality." — Theodore Roose- 
 velt. 
 
 "The club is mightier than the constitution." — In- 
 spector Schmittberger, of the New York police force 
 in the riot in Union Square on March 28, 1908. 
 
 "To hell with the constitution!" Major McClel- 
 land, commanding the state militia (paid by the mine 
 owners' association) during the Colorado miners' 
 strike and lockout in 1904. 
 
 "The public be damned. I am not running this 
 road for the benefit of the public. I am running it for 
 my own benefit." — Cornelius Vanderbilt, of New York 
 Central railroad. 
 
 "I see no solution for the problem until hunger 
 compels capitulation." — Charles L. Eiditz, president 
 of New York Trades Employer's association, during 
 the lockout in July, 1903. 
 
 "I acknowledge no civil power. I claim to be su- 
 preme judge and director of the consciences of men. I 
 am sole, last supreme judge of what is right and what 
 is wrong." — Cardinal Manning. 
 
 "In a Republican district, I am a Republican. In a 
 Democratic district, a Democrat. In a doubtful district, 
 I am doubtful. But first, last and all the time I am for 
 the Erie railroad." — Jay Gould. 
 
 49 
 
"The rights and interests of the laboring man will 
 be protected and cared for, not only by labor agitators, 
 but by the Christian men to whom God, in His infinite 
 wisdom, has given control of the property interests of 
 the country." — George M. Baer, mine owner. 
 
 "The right of property rests not upon philosoph- 
 ical or scientific speculation or upon the commendable 
 impulses of benevolence or charity nor yet upon the dic- 
 tates of natural justice." — From the decision of the 
 New York court of Appeals on Workingmen's Com- 
 pensation. This court held the common law assump- 
 tion to be that the worker assumes the risk of his em- 
 ployment, thereby blocking workingmen's compensa- 
 tion laws. 
 
 Why Socialists Should Study Law. 
 
 In view of statements such as these — and the list 
 could be indefinitely lengthened — and also with due 
 consideration for the trend! of past and present events, 
 no Socialist can deny that we stand today confronted 
 by an urgent need of Socialist lawyers, legislators and 
 judges. We have, at present, only a mere sprinkling 
 of such men, a mere drop in the capitalist bucket. In 
 all right and justice there should be more Socialist and 
 working-class lawyers than all others combined, for 
 they would represent a class which far outnumbers all 
 other classes. Practicing before our bar, and sitting 
 on our bench, they could and would interpret the law 
 in accord with human life and sympathy, rather than 
 in accord with cold and bloodless property-rights. 
 
 Law, in its development and present application, 
 has lagged far behind the march of events. It still 
 
 50 
 
lingers in the misty past of centuries dead and gone. 
 Our marital and ecclesiastical laws are relics of Roman 
 days. Our courts are ruled by masses of musty pre- 
 cedents, instead of by reason, right and justice. Yet, 
 even so, we must understand and use the law as it is, 
 before transforming it into what it should be ; and on 
 the actual ground of present-day law we must meet the 
 capitalist class and beat them at their own game. Then, 
 and only then, can we simplify and modernize our 
 codes and so metamorphize them that they shall com- 
 fort and protect, instead of crushing and oppressing 
 Labor. 
 
 We are being governed and controlled today by 
 the rules established by a small body of constitutional 
 delegates 125 years ago, when this country had neither 
 machinery, manufacturing nor industrial workmen. 
 Capitalist-made law protects and safeguards property 
 to a point where it is almost impossible to tax it or to 
 make it pay for the damages to life or limb which re- 
 sult in the course of its exploitation. Behind the im- 
 posing fortress of law Capitalism rules supreme. 
 
 The popular mind is today filled with fear, sus- 
 picion and hatred of the law and lawyers, of courts and 
 judges. Under Socialism, if it be what we believe it 
 will be, a wholly different character will pervade the 
 profession, and the world will love, honor and respect 
 it as the guardian of our liberties. One thing is cer- 
 tain; sooner or later we Socialists are going to take 
 charge of this government. As a safeguard of peace 
 and a guarantee of a quiet, legal, orderly change of 
 
 51 
 
administration, we must educate a sufficient number of 
 our own members, in the law, and do it by peaceful and 
 lawful means. 
 
 With legal power in our hands, we can make a 
 fact of democracy and of our Republic, in place of the 
 specious, false and deceptive appearance of popular 
 rule which has till now masked the reality of govern- 
 ment by Gold. If majority rule is right, is it then just 
 for a minority, composed of a few judges, to defeat 
 the will of the majority? Capitalism could not stand 
 an hour if the minority did not rule today. As the 
 capitalist class is in the minority, so it must have some 
 means of controlling the people, and that control is 
 exercised through the courts. Our law-making system 
 is wholly in violence of the Declaration of Independ- 
 ence, and to the provisions of the latter document the 
 Socialists will rigidly adhere. 
 
 The simplest constitution is the best; the least com- 
 plicated machinery of organization the most effective. 
 The working class, with all whose material interest are 
 kindfered, has no complaint against the lawyer as an in- 
 dividual, but of lawyers as a class they are rightly dis- 
 trustful. 
 
 Once we establish Socialist lawyers as a class, work- 
 ing with and in sympathy with the interests of the pro- 
 letariat, the present hostility toward the profession 
 will cease, and confidence will replace an only too just 
 suspicion. 
 
 Socialists, clear-visioned and firmly grounded in 
 fact, constitute the only class sufficiently intelligent, co- 
 
 52 
 
herent and determined to offer any effective resistance 
 to judicial tyranny, or to formulate any remedial meas- 
 ures. Our propaganda is swiftly spreading, and power 
 is coming to our hands. In municipalities, counties, 
 states,* and in the nation, we need legal skill to guide 
 us in the impending work of social administration. 
 Capitalism foresees the issue, and is already at work 
 raising the standards of admission to the bar. Many 
 states have already enacted requirements practically 
 prohibiting members of the working class from prac- 
 ticing law — some requirements even demanding a col- 
 lege degree as a prime requisite for admission to the 
 bar. These barriers must be attacked and broken 
 down, if the working class is ever to take any hand, 
 save by the proxy of capitalist lawyers and adminis- 
 trators, in the making and enforcing of the law. 
 
 The Call to Action. 
 
 Most of the majesty and dignity of the law is mere 
 poppycock, gendered by the purposeful aloofness, the 
 "thunderings out of Sinai," of the ruling class and its 
 legal retainers. Law is today, in fact, merely a code 
 of haphazard guesses, backed by mystery and prece- 
 dent. It should be in working class hands, and should 
 be as simple as the Ten Commandments. Concerning 
 these, no differences of opinion exist. They are plain, 
 simple and explicit; and he who runs may read them. 
 
 So might the law be. So must it be, ere justice 
 shall be done. The purposeful scheming of the prop- 
 ertied classes, to keep the making and administration 
 
 S3 
 
of the law in its own hands, must be met by the work- 
 ing class itself breaking into this profession in consid- 
 erable numbers. Nor is it an impossible task, thus to 
 unlock the postern of Capitalism and let the army of 
 the workers enter into the citadel of power. Any man 
 or woman of average intelligence, able to read and 
 write the English language, can learn the essentials of 
 the subject in no very great time. 
 
 Patrick Henry, the revolutionary orator, Henry 
 Clay, "the mill-boy of the slashes," and Abraham Lin- 
 coln, the Illinois rail-splitter, all serve as eminent ex- 
 amples of men who made a marked success in the legal 
 profession, in spite of having lacked every opportunity 
 for an education, save such as they created for them- 
 selves. What these men did, others can do. And the 
 spirit of the times calls loudly for action. It is the 
 urgent duty of every Socialist to prepare himself for 
 the oncoming charge. 
 
 Let me now recapitulate and summarize the situa- 
 tion, once for all, and! make it as clear as type and 
 paper can. Under a class government like ours, where 
 every weapon available must be seized by the workers 
 in their effort at self-emancipation, the study and prac- 
 tice of law becomes a matter of extreme importance. 
 In practically every relation existing between the capi- 
 talist class and the working class, the issue of law is 
 injected, and almost without exception the balance of 
 power remains with the masters. Law and administra- 
 tion form today the strongest bulwark of class rule. So 
 long as law remains "the mystery and possession of a 
 
 54 
 
class, and not the heritage of all mankind," the work- 
 ers will continue to find themselves at a tremendous dis- 
 advantage if they neglect to train members from their 
 own ranks to function as lawyers and! judges. 
 
 The necessity for Socialist lawyers arises constant- 
 ly. In every election where the game of disfranchise- 
 ment or ballot-stealing is attempted by the master class, 
 working class attorneys are urgently needed. In every 
 accident case where just compensation is evaded by 
 black-robed capitalist-kept judges, the worker's inter- 
 est must be defended by a Socialist lawyer. Contests 
 for office, when Socialists are elected, and harrassing 
 obstructionist tactics by capitalist opposition must be 
 met and can only be met by the vigorous action of well- 
 informed thoroughly qualified Socialist attorneys. 
 
 Every free-speech fight demands similar action. In 
 rural districts, the defense of homestead titles, of pen- 
 sions, patents and similar rights and privileges calls 
 urgently for the services of lawyers working under the 
 inspiration of the Socialist viewpoint. The proletariat, 
 urban and rural alike, needs a corps of Socialist experts 
 to explain, unravel and interpret for them the antiquat- 
 ed and bewildering legal complications which involve 
 every personal and property right. 
 
 In the battle today being waged between the con- 
 tending classes of society, the one supremely powerful 
 weapon is the function of making, interpreting and en- 
 forcing the law. Beside this power, all others sink into 
 insignificance. "Direct action" with its strikes and tur- 
 bulence, becomes puerile by comparison. Political 
 
 55 
 
power, if it does not include the control of the courts, 
 grows impotent. Government today is being carried 
 on by the capitalist class with the lawyer, the legislator 
 and the judge as its tools. We have a government of 
 the people, by the lawyers, for the trusts. Only a blind 
 man can fail to see the vital importance of Socialists 
 themselves taking possession of this all-controlling 
 power, the law. 
 
 The legislator and the judge have today replaced 
 the soldier and the priest as controlling forces in so- 
 ciety. They constitute capitalism's ultimate bulwark 
 against the encroachments of Socialism. Class rule 
 could not continue an hour without the gowned aloof- 
 ness of the courts. "Let me name the judges and I 
 care not who rebels" might form an appropriate motto 
 for the capitalist system. 
 
 These facts are so obviously patent to all Socialists 
 that none should fail to heed the corollary: If we are 
 ever to assume effective control of society, it must be 
 through attaining control of the legal machinery of the 
 land. Our own ranks contain little skill or talent along 
 these lines. When we elect officials, we must for the 
 most part employ capitalist lawyers to draft our bills 
 and to conduct the complex process of legal procedure. 
 Lacking lawyers and judges inspired by our ideals and 
 dominated by our viewpoint, we run the risk of be- 
 trayal on every hand. We are enjoined, harassed and 
 rendered impotent by the legal tools of capitalism; and 
 as yet we possess neither skill nor technical knowledge 
 to combat and overcome this sinister force. 
 
 56 
 
The working class needs men competent to practice 
 in every court and to sit on every judicial bench, from 
 the lowest to the highest. We urgently must have hun- 
 dreds and thousands of trained legal minds to take up 
 and carry on the impending burdens of government and 
 administration. Without this force, Socialism is mere- 
 ly riding to a fall. It cannot rule; it cannot hold such 
 ground as it may win. Its charge over the barricade 
 will be met by legal fusillades which will mow it down. 
 For, in the arsenal of power, the law and the courts 
 are at last resort the rapid-fire magazine guns. 
 
 Socialist lawyers ! The call is imperative, the need 
 urgent. For already the hour of responsibility is ap- 
 proaching. And if it finds us unarmed and unprepared, 
 victory must wither to defeat and the long, bitter fight 
 will have been fought in vain. 
 
 Socialists ! Take up the weapon, the master- 
 weapon of all, the law! Bind not your hands in sloth, 
 nor your feet in futility. Arm yourselves — but not 
 with weapons of destruction. Let the law be your 
 shield and buckler, for in this sign shall you surely 
 conquer. 
 
 Remember the clarion-call of Debs: "The days 
 before us invite to action as never before. The field 
 is dazzlingly attractive!" Remember again the words 
 of Warren, when, persecuted and harrassed, he faced 
 his black-gowned judges : 
 
 "Slowly, painfully, proceeds the struggle of man 
 against the power of Mammon. The past is written 
 in tears and blood. The future is dim and unknown, 
 
 57 
 
but the final outcome of this world-wide struggle is 
 not in doubt. Freedom will conquer slavery, truth 
 will prevail over error, justice will triumph over in- 
 justice, the light will vanquish the darkness, and hu- 
 manity, disenthralled, will rise in the glory of universal 
 brotherhood." 
 
 Appendix. 
 
 Being a Partial List of Legal Decisions and Injunc- 
 tions in Favor of Capital and Against Labor. 
 
 "Refusing to haul cars a conspiracy." — T., A. & 
 N. M. Ry. vs. Pennsylvania Co., 54 Fed. Rep. 730, 
 April 3, 1893. Taft, circuit judge. 
 
 "Quitting work is criminal." — Same, April 3, 1893. 
 Taft, circuit judge. 
 
 "A workman considered 'under control.' " — T., A. 
 & N. M. Ry. vs. Pennsylvania Co. et al., 54 Fed. Rep., 
 746, March 25, 1893. Ricks, circuit judge. 
 
 "Serving of injunction notice unnecessary." — In re 
 Lennon, 166 U. S., 548. Brown, judge. 
 
 "The black-list lawful."— N. Y., C. & St. L. Ry. 
 Co. vs. Schaffer, 65 Ohio, 41b, Jan. 21, 1902. 
 
 "Effort to unionize shop unlawful." — Lowe et al. 
 vs. Lawler et al., 208 U. S., 274, Feb. 3, 1908. 
 
 "Contract work to union house is void." — State vs. 
 Toole, 26 Mont, 22. 
 
 "Constitutional to require men to leave union." — 
 People vs. Harrv Marcus, 185 N. Y., 257, .May 25, 
 1906. 
 
 "Union labor has no right to conduct a strike." — 
 Alfred W. Booth & Co. vs, Burgess et al., 65 Atlantic 
 Reporter, 226, Nov. 26, 1906. 
 
"Unlawful to induce non-union men to quit work." 
 — Enterprise Foundry Co. vs. Iron Moulders' union, 
 112 N. W., 685, July 1, 1907. 
 
 "The unfair list forbidden."— Wilson et al., 332 
 111., 389, Feb. 20, 1908. 
 
 "Employer has right to bar out unions." — Flaccus 
 vs. Smith, 199 Pa. St., 128. 
 
 "Anti-Trust Act applies to Labor Unions as well 
 as to combinations of capitalists." — U. S. vs. Working- 
 men's Amalgamated Council, 54 Fed. Rep. 994; Loewe 
 vs. Lawlor, 208 U. S., 274. 
 
 "The boycott is unlawful." — Loewe vs. Lawlor, 
 208 U. S., 274. 
 
 "Members of Labor Unions liable to threefold 
 damages for injuries in business or property sustained 
 by individuals or firms by reason of a boycott." — 
 Loewe vs. Lawlor, 208 U. S., 274. 
 
 "A combination of men to secure or compel the 
 employment of none but union men is unlawful." — U. 
 S. vs. Workingmen's Amalgamated Council, 54 Fed. 
 Rep. 994. 
 
 ''Unlawful to threaten a strike." — John O'Brien vs. 
 People ex rel. Kellogg Switchboard & Supply Co., 216 
 111., 354, June 23, 1905. 
 
 "Effort to unionize a house is unlawful." — J. L. 
 Purvis et al. Local No. 500 U. B. of Carpenters and 
 Joiners, 214 Pa. St., 348, March 19, 1906. 
 
 "The boycott is unlawful." — Shine et al. vs. Fox 
 Bros. Mfg. Co., 156 Fed. Red. 357, Oct. 19, 1907. 
 
 "Unions liable to suit for damages." — Leucke vs. 
 Clothing Cutters' & Trimmers' Assembly, 77 Md., 
 396, Madch 16, 1893. 
 
 59 
 
"The closed shop is illegal." — A. R. Barnes & 
 Co. et al. vs. Berry et al., 156 Fed. Rep., 72, Oct. 21, 
 1907. 
 
 "Unlawful to ask reasons for discharge." — Wal- 
 lace vs. Georgia, Carolina & Northern Ry. Co., 94 
 Ga., 732, June 18, 1894. 
 
 "Blacklisting cannot be prohibited." — Wisconsin 
 ex rel. Theodore Zillner vs. Louis Kreutzberg, 58 L. 
 R. A., 748, May 9, 1902. 
 
 "Maintaining a picket is unlawful." — A., T. & S. 
 F. Ry. Co. vs. Gee et al., 139 Fed. Rep. July 10, 1905. 
 
 "Cannot limit hours of labor by law." — Holden vs. 
 Hardy, 169 U. S., 366, Feb. 28, 1898. 
 
 ".Payment in checks legal." — Kentucky court of ap- 
 peals, Avent-Beattyville Coal Co., Appt. vs. Common- 
 wealth of Kentucky, Dec. 1, 1894. 
 
 "Employer has a right to discharge a union man." 
 — Wisconsin supreme court, State of Wisconsin ex rel. 
 Theodore Zillner, Plff. in error, vs. Louis J. Kreutz- 
 berg, 58 L. R. A., 748, May 19, 1902. 
 
 "Eight-hour day unconstitutional." — Nebraska su- 
 preme court, Charles G. Low, Plff. in error, vs. Rees 
 Printing Co., 24 L. R. A., 702-708. 
 
 "Eight-hour law illegal." — Ohio supreme court, 
 City of Cleveland, Plff. vs. Clements Bros. Construc- 
 tion Co., 59 L. R. A,, 775. 
 
 "Protection of laborers illegal." — Colorado su- 
 preme court — Re Thomas A. Morgan, 47 L. R. A., 
 52, July 17, 1899. - 
 
 "Limiting check payment unconstitutional." — Indi- 
 ana supreme court, Nathan G. Dixon, Appt., vs. James 
 H. Poe, 60 L. R. A., 308, Nov. 25, 1902. 
 
 60 
 
"Unlawful to fix wages by law." — New York su- 
 preme Court, People ex rel. Wm. J. Rodgers, Respt., 
 vs. Bird S. Coler, Appt., 166 N. Y., 52 L. R. A. 814. 
 
 "Protection of laborer not required." — New York 
 court of Appeals, Sarah Knisley, Respt., vs. Pascal P. 
 Pratt et al., Appts., 148 N. Y., 362; 32 L. R. A., 367. 
 
 "No extra pay for extra hours." — New York court 
 of appeals, People, Respt'., vs. James H. Phyfe, Appt., 
 Jan. 17, 1893. 
 
 "Employer not responsible for death of employe." 
 — Circuit court of appeals, eighth circuit, March 19, 
 1900. Westland vs. Gold Coin Mines Co., 101 Fed. 
 Rep., 59, 64, 6S and 66. 
 
 "Labor check payments are legal." — Massachusetts 
 supreme judicial court. Commonwealth of Massachu- 
 setts vs. Josiah Perry. 14 L. R. A., 326. 
 
 "No remedy for labor except personal suit" — Mas- 
 sachusetts supreme court. Dianah Worthington et al., 
 Appts., vs. James Warring et al., 157 Mass., 421. 
 
 "Employers need not furnish doctor to injured." — 
 Massachusetts supreme judicial court. Alexander Da- 
 vis by next friend vs. William H. Forbes, 171 Mass., 
 548. 
 
 "Employers not liable for injuries." — Massachu- 
 setts supreme court. Wm. O'Mally vs. South Boston 
 Gaslight Co., 158 Mass., 135. 
 
 "Altering contract is legal for employers." — Illi- 
 nois supreme court. Richard Ptmsey, Appt., vs. Peo- 
 ple of Illinois, 17 fer R. A., 853. 
 
 "Employers need not recommend satisfactory em- 
 ployes." — Illinois supreme court. C, C, C. & L. Ry. 
 Co., Appt., vs. Charles Jenkins, 174 111., 398. 
 
 61 
 
"Legal to jail a man a month without trial." — Ore- 
 gon supreme court. Longshore Printing & Publishing 
 Co., Appt, vs. George H. Howell et al., 26 Ore., 527. 
 
 "The right to blacklist upheld." — Kentucky court 
 of appeals. John Hundley, Appt., vs. L. & N. Ry. 
 Co., 105 Ky., 162. 
 
 "Any wilful attempt of employes of a railroad in 
 the hands of a receiver to impede or hinder the opera- 
 tion of the road is contempt of court." — Thomas vs. 
 C. N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co., 62 Fed. Rep. 803, Taft, 
 circuit judge. 
 
 "To instigate a strike on a road in the hands of a 
 receiver is unlawful and a contempt of court."- — Thom- 
 as vs. C. N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co., 62 Fed. Rep. 803, 
 Taft, circuit judge. 
 
 "A boycott is an unlawful conspiracy." — Thomas 
 vs. C. N. O. &. T. P. Ry. Co., 62 Fed. Rep. 803, Taft, 
 circuit judge. 
 
 "A sympathetic strike is an unlawful conspiracy by 
 reason of its purpose, whether such purpose is effected 
 by means usually lawful or otherwise." — Thomas vs. 
 C. N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co., 62 Fed. Rep. 803, Taft, 
 circuit judge. 
 
 "Any obstructing or retarding the mails by strikes 
 is an unlawful conspiracy in violation of Section 3975, 
 Revised Statutes, although the obstruction is effected 
 by merely quitting employment." — Thomas vs. C. N. 
 O. & T.-P. Ry. Co., 62 Fed. Rep. 803, Taft, circuit 
 judge. 
 
 "A law forbidding discrimination against an em- 
 ploye because, of his membership in a labor union, and 
 making it a misdemeanor for an employer to discharge 
 an employe because of membership in a labor union, is 
 unconstitutional." — Adair case, 208 U. S. 161. 
 
 62 
 
1 
 
 6503