THE BONDAGE OF THE MANY. 519 monopolists. "Influential" indeed they are, since presidents, and governors, congress and legislatures stand ready to do their bidding. "Anarchists" indeed they are, because they expect by violent means of organized armies, and "conspiracy laws" to maintain their hateful supremacy over the people of the United States. The dynamite bomb is the weapon of despair. The American workingmen have not reached the plane of despair yet. American workers of all classes still feel confident of their ability, through the medium of party organization, free speech, free ballot and a just and fair count of votes, to redeem their country from the rule of alien monopolists ("influential anarchists') that have secured their present hateful, but I trust, temporary supremacy over the American producers and laborers by hoodwinking the masses, through the agency of a venal party press and a system of wholesale corruption and bribery of party leaders, and to secure such reforms as our Christian civilization and the social progress of the age demand. "Noble ends by peaceful means," is the voice of the native toilers of the United States. "Let no John Browns be hung, no martyr blood be shed under the forms of the law," is, also I believe, their unanimous de cree. V. The Designs of Monopoly. What the "influential anarchists" (monopolists) mean to do is no secret. The huge standing army of national guards, the bloodhounds of corporate tyranny, I call them, so stealthily organized by those heartless conspirators against democratic liberty, and that number today, in the several states of the Union, more than a quarter of a million of well drilled and superbly armed and gorgeously equipped soldiers, is intended solely, by those conspirators, to be used to silence the just demands of the workers for higher wages and shorter hours of labor, to prevent social progress, to stop intellectual advancement by means of compulsion. A United States "encampment" (convention) of officers of the national guard of the several states of the Union was held at Washington in December, 1885. A press dispatch says: "General Hartranft made a speech, in which he cautioned cautious action so as not to arouse opposition." Does not this go to show that the secret building up and strengthening of this gigantic military power, is a movement, not of the people, but a class? "Cautious action, so as not to arouse opposition" of whom? The people, of course. The same dispatch goes on to say, "The committee appointed to draft a bill for presentation to congress for the benefit of the national guard, submitted a message proposing an appropriation by the national government of a million dollars annually, and providing for its expenditure for equipments, ammunition, tents, ordnance stores and camp equipage, to be distributed only among the uniformed militia (national guard) of the several states." This is significant when we consider, that even in freedom-loving Iowa, the real militia, the people are forbidden by law to "parade, drill or appear in procession, with arms in their hands, without license of the governor, except," says the code, that "members of benevolent organizations may wear swords." A facetious newspaper editor, the late J. M. Dixon, of Des Moines, repeatedly, through the local columns of the Iowa Citizen, in the early days of Iowa's history, used to "most respectfully and humbly petition the legislature of the state," to pass a law "for the protection of dogs against the ravages of sheep." Plainly the national guard was instituted to protect the monopolists against the ravages of the people, else why are the people disarmed? But the "members of benevolent organizations may wear swords." So, possibly, without greatly endangering the thrones of the Cyclops (the huge corporation kings that rule America), the old Union soldiers domiciled in Iowa, sixty thousand strong, members of grand army posts, (a benevolent organization,") have been condescendingly granted, by the grace of the monopolists, the privilege" of "wearing swords," but the guns, that in their hands saved the life of the republic, they may not, even on the Fourths of July, or the anniversaries of the great victories won by their valor, legally carry "without license of the governor," while the red-eyed and bloody-mouthed dogs of the corporations, the national guard, because of their carefully sharpened teeth, whetted expressly to tear the flesh of workingmen, women and little chidren, were looked upon "with pride" by a former executive of our state; for in his biennial message of 1884, Governor Sherman says: "I am proud of the national guard. Their correctness in drill and in all the maneuvers of field and garrison can scarcely be equaled by veteran troops, compelling even the warm endorsement of officers of the United States army.' While our worthy governor may have fancied he saw in the superb organization and drill of our Practorian guard, good reason for pride on his part, it may be a good reason for a very different feeling on the part of a liberty-loving people, jealous of their rights, and remembering always that republics are never overthrown, except by military power. I suppose that the colonial governor of Massachusetts, General Gage, in 1775, could, and perhaps did, give to the British ministry the same reasons why he was "proud" of the brigades encapmed on Boston Common. But Otis and Warren, and Adams, and Hancock, and Putnam, and the other proscribed patriots of that day, did not see it in the same light with the governor of Massachusetts. They did not like to be pushed and shoved about with butts of muskets and the points of bayonets, though the Redcoats were "correct in drill and in all the maneuvers of field and garrison"--the question being not "are they correct in drill?” but why are they drilled?— and that is the question now before the people of America. I understand that the Secretary of War at Washington (1889) has offered to furnish every college that will organize a company of guards (of monopoly) a Gatling gun and a hundred and fifty repeating rifles. Unfortunately, "strikers" are usually too poor to give their sons a "college education," hence "college boys" are presumed to be excellent material for an army ready and willing to shoot into the crowds of "strikers," and put down so-called "labor riots." Any organized protest of wage workers against enslavement, is considered by the monopolists a "labor riot," to be suppressed by force of arms. The workers of our country to-day are proscribed by king monopoly, as those elder patriots were by the king of England. We have had proscription enforced, too, in Iowa already, at the bayonets' point, by the well drilled minions of corporate tyranny -the national guard. How long has it been since the Adjutant-General of this state took a detail of those guards, muskets loaded, bayonets fixed, without mandate of court or requisition of sheriff, obeying purely a dictatorial decree of a misguided state executive, and with sledge-hammer battered down an office door in the state capitol at Des Moines and "at the point of the bayonet," dispossed of his office a one-armed state official (Hon. J. L. Brown), elected by the people: and that, too, after the judge of the circuit court (Judge Conner), had affirmed th The Pennsylvania guard "have the same uniform as the regular army, the same muskets and the same discipline, and Pennsylvania could send very good soldiers to the field in twenty-four hours fit to be brigaded with regulars.- Gen. W. T. Sherman, THE BONDAGE OF THE MANY, 521 legal right of the official to hold his office, as great a political crime, on the part of the governor of Iowa, I contend, as that which cost Charles First his crown and head; but which the rash governor of our state could not and would not have attempted to commit, except for the prompt seconding of the "Second Alexander" with his invincible "guard." The difference between autocratic and popular government, I understand, to be this, viz: An autocrat may issue his ukase and the military stands ever ready to enforce it; while neither the president of the United States nor the governor of any state may legally issue a decree, in peace or war, to be enforced by military power; except in districts where, in time of actual war, military law has in due form superceded the civil, as when Lincoln issued his emancipation proclamation; because the military is declared by the constitution of the United States, and of each of the states, "subordinate to the civil power." But has the huge army of mercenary tools of corporate despotism -the national guard of the several states-any disposition to go farther than to enforce, with the bayonet, the unlawful decrees of corporation-controlled state executives, and through them, the decrees of foreign syndicates, resolved upon the destruction of democratic government and the enslavement of labor the world over and especially resolved upon holding the agriculturists of North America tributary forever to the Rothchilds and Barings the gold barons of Europe? Two hundred and fifty thousand well armed and well drilled soldiers in this day of railroads and telegraphs, may become dangerous to popular liberty, (we might reasonably fear, if they, as an army, in their organized capacity, presumed to "look after legislation at Washington." We know why Caesar crossed the Rubicon and destroyed the Republic of Rome. His soldiers took it into their heads to "look after legislation" at the capital. It was the same with Cromwell's army and the same with the army of Napoleon the First. But what do our two hundred and fifty thousand national guards in wolf-like innocence purpose to do? Is there no danger threatened to popular liberty by them? Are they not taking gigantic strides toward the subversion of republican government itself? I see that guard, an ugly snake coiled in the grass. I hear its warning rattle when workingmen are being slaughtered by the discharge of repeating rifles in the hands of those mercenaries ---its hateful head raised high in air, its mouth wide open showing its poison fangs ready to strike deep into the flesh of the unsuspecting commonwealth. Read, O patriots of America, the following quotations, and ponder their significance. I copy from the "Iowa Review," the organ of the Iowa guard. The April number of 1884, says: "The fourth convention of the national guard association, of which adjutant general W. L. Alexander is secretary, was held at Cincinnati, March 26th and 27th, and was well attended, there being fifteen states represented.” The national guard of the several states of the Union is, then, being united into an immense "trust so that concurrent action, I assert, may be had by them in any great movement they may conclude to make against the liberties of the people--and history plainly proves that such a final movement will be made by the military power just as sure and as soon as it becomes strong enough in any nation, and well disciplined enough to make the establishment of a military despotism seemingly practicable. In short, history declares that the army will govern if it can; nor will our "state regulars" prove to be an exception to the rule, nor will they scruple, when the time to strike ar rives, to wade through a sea of blood to accomplish their purpose, as did the Roman legions under Antony, Lepidus and Caesar. Now is a dark day of "trusts" and "rings;"—and a huge "army trust," "ring" or consolidated organization means the enslavement of the unarmed many. It bodes no good to democratic liberty. The Review further enlightens us, as to the immediate object of the guard in perfecting a national organization, when it says: "On motion of General Alexander, a committee of five was appointed to look after legislation at Washington." Two hundred and fifty thousand armed guards in the American Union "as well drilled as regulars," holding political conventions and working to build up their power and strength through legislationlobbying in the halls of Congress-working with a single purpose in view the building up of an army under pay and subject to the control of the corporate money power of the nation, urged on and directed by London bankers, are a most dangerous menace to democratic liberty, I declare. And their dangerous purpose is here openly avowed in plain English. If the Union army during the rebellion had appointed, through its officers, a committee to "look after legislation at Washington," what would have been its significance? Revolution. Can the patriot, jealous of his liberty, see any other design and end than revolution in such threatening action by the powerful national guard of America? I think not. Again the Review says: "Quite a lengthy discussion was had on holding an encampment at Washington; but it was laid over till next meeting as also a code of the United tSates." The national guard, is not, therefore, just a local militia organization, as the people vainly imagine; but a great military power near akin to the regular army-compactly organized with a "code of the United States." It is a vast, compact, selfish, mercenary "trust" with repeating rifles in their hands, as well as ballots, with which to enforce their decrees. The Review declares: "General Drum, adjutant general of the United States at Washington, favors the encampment of regular troops with the national guards, and is waiting with much interest the efforts of the guards throughout the state, and he in company with the secretary of war, and other prominent officials, are expected to be present at the encampment at Dubuque, as that will be a special part of the program."* So, then, we have an immense organization of well-drilled soldiers, holding national conventions, (congresses), united under a "code of the United States" of their own enactment, "inspected" by regular army officers, and "looking after legislation at Washington," with the ballot in the one hand and the Springfield repeating rifle in the other -moving of its own motion, like a great, wriggling, uneasy reptile, lean and hungry-capable, willing and ready to descend upon any quarter of the Union in a few hours at the command of its officersa hydra of two hundred and fifty thousand heads, that must be slain or liberty speedily perish. * Washington, Nov. 8, 1887.--(Associated Press Dispatch.)-Adjutant General Drum, in his annual report to the secretary of war, states that the steadily increasing interest manifested by the militia of the states is evidenced by the high percentage of attendance at the annual encampments and the generally excellent military spirit of the troops. With the liberal increase of appropriations made at the last session of congress it is earnestly hoped that the state military authorities will be increased in the allowance of ammunition, foster and develop the efficiency of the rank and file in target firing. He recommends the establishment, during each encampment of officers, a school for instruction in battalion drill and organization and post. He also suggests the advantage of holding weekly, during the winter months, a non-commissioned officers' school-and for instructors young officers of the regular army who could be spared during the winter to report to the adjutant generals of the states on application of the governors, THE BONDAGE OF THE MANY. 523 The millions of farmers and wage-workers of America will soon be compelled to see, and to their sorrow acknowledge, what I most clearly see now, and would have all patriots and lovers of liberty see before it is too late to be remedied, that the government and the people of our country have become in fact, and (if our army of national guards,-"state regulars"-remain a fixed institution), will continue to be two distinct, different and antagonistic things, as in Russia, Egypt India and Ireland-the government a despotism and the people slaves. VII. "In the Next Few Years." Colonel Dodge, of the United States Regular army, was lately commissioned by the authorities of the state of Iowa to "inspect" the Iowa national guard, and in his report to the adjutant general of our state significantly says: "For the use to which the Iowa national guard is likely to be put within the next few years, battalion organization and drill in battalion movements are of paramount importance." What imaginable rebellion of wage slaves, or uprising of the 'dangerous" agriculturists, I ask, is likely to occur "in the next few years," in the peaceful and liberty-loving state of Iowa, where reside today sixty thousand Union veterans of the late war, that renders of "paramount importance" battalion organization and drill in battalion movements of this mercenary band of so-called "national guards?" But manifestly the only "use" to which this trained Praetorian band of quasi regulars is likely to be put in the "next few years," if the wishes of the "lords of cash" who work the wage slaves, should be carried out, as the wishes of the "lords of the lash," who worked the chattel slaves, were carried out by the bombardment of Fort Sumter, April, 1861, and that renders of "paramount importance battalion organization and drill in battalion movements," is war and only war. Than war what other purpose of "paramount importance," in the name of Liberty, I ask, can any one conceive an army to exist for of six regiments, well drilled in the use of the murderous engines of modern butchery of human beings, including the Gatling gun, and at a cost to the peace-loving people of Iowa of many thousands of dollars annually the constitution of the state to the contrary notwithstanding. Our six regiments, filled up to the maximum contemplated in the Iowa code, would cost the state (as their legal pay now is) 6,000 men (privates) each $1.50 per diem, six days drill yearly: Two years One suit each uniform clothing, $25 per suit Total biennial cost to the people of the state would aggre- $108,000 150,000 25,000 . $283,000 And this in the face of a positive constitutional prohibition of the "keeping up of a standing army in time of peace," and which means that to pay even one cent to "keep up" an army in time of peace is unlawful. The enemies of popular liberty, I declare, expect to be able to put a stop to "industrial discontent," not by doing justice by the workingmen and farmers, but by bloodshed-not by removing the cause of the discontent by equitable laws but by shooting the discontented with Gatling guns and repeating rifles in the hands of the mercenary guards, detectives and policemen. That is unquestionably the program of the employers of labor on this continent in their dealings with the workingmen and farmers, since already time and again, they have dipped their hateful hands in the blood of our workers, men, women and children, as it is of the |