On the 1903 British Columbia Election 1903

“Small and Early” Given by Socialists

The Socialist Party held a meeting in the opera house last evening, the building not being more than half filled at the commencement, and many of those present were ladies and young people.

Mr. Ogle took the chair and Messrs Hawthornthwaite and Kingsley occupied seats on the platform. The proceedings were commenced with a socialist song in which the audience joined.

Mr. Ogle, in his opening remarks, pointed out that according to the report of the meeting at Victoria of the day before the Socialists had not been the offenders against public order, although such conduct was commonly charged against them.

Touching upon Liberal professions of love and of labor men, Mr. Ogle pointed out that the Liberal Party at Vancouver had nominated a full ticket. The other side were no better but they made fewer professions and were he not a Socialist he would be a Conservative as that was the more honest of the two (Applause). They were going to have some Socialism that evening not mud slinging. It was not a question of Smith or Hawthornthwaite or Kingsley, but a question of Socialism. They were for principles not for men. The question was which of the three candidates was the best. They believed that Mr. Hawthornthwaite’s record showed that he was and they would return him on election day at the head of the poll.

The speaker concluded by expressing the view that the Free Press reports of the political meetings were fair, a sentiment of which the audience registered its approval.

Mr. J. H. Hawthornthwaite, who was evidently suffering from a severe cold said that nowhere but in Nanaimo had a labor candidate been put up in opposition to a Socialist. Elsewhere the Labor Parties through out the province had passed resolutions endorsing him and expressing the hope that he would be returned.

He had not gone into personalities to any extent during the campaign and he wished his opponents had taken the same course. The electors did not want to hear them. If anyone wanted to know anything of him he was willing to tell him all he asked.

At Vancouver the previous evening he had attacked Mr. Joseph Martin but neither Liberal nor Conservative papers had said much about it. The speaker here paid tribute to Mr. Martin’s courage in discussing Socialism in the presence of a hostile audience and displaying colossal ignorance of the subject.

The Nanaimo Herald and the Free Press had been discussing Socialism at length. There were some errors in the Free Press reports of his speeches. On the part of the Free Press this had, he thought, been unintentional but the Herald did not mean to report him fairly and had put into his mouth statements he had never made. The Free Press had made a mistake in missing out a word—“comforts”—when he had said “necessities and comforts.” That made a very great difference, so great a difference that it had destroyed the principal fact of the argument in that day’s Free Press. An attempt had also been made to show a difference between the ideas of Mr. Kingsley and himself. Mr. Kingsley had repeatedly followed him on the platform, but he had not heard him object to any statement he had made recently at all events.

The speaker here paid a tribute to Mr. Kingsley’s knowledge of Socialism which was practically an exact science, but respecting the final workout out of which it was possible for Mr. Kingsley to have an opinion, and he himself another.

The Free Press asked how they intended to divide the product of their toil. It would be time enough to decide that when workers had it in their own hands. That might be left to the future. The workers must settle that themselves. The tyranny of officialdom feared by the Free Press was practically impossible. Today their bosses were a fixture. Labor had nothing to say as to their appointment or discharge. Under Socialism the workers would have to decide who should take charge and have power to dismiss them if unfitted for their work.

Owing to his physical unfitness he would not occupy any further time that evening. (Applause).

Mr. E. T. Kingsley said it was unfortunately true that at various public meetings that evening through out the province the time of the public would be wasted in watching a competitive mud-slinging match. It was not argument and no cause could be maintained in that way.

Mr. Kingsley gave an exposition of Socialism, the principal points of which were as follows:

There were two ways of making a living—by profit and by labor. The legal right to both of these was secured. Profit was something that was obtained for nothing. Mr. Kingsley here went onto describe the development of the means of wealth production and of the capitalist system. Dealing with capital Mr. Kingsley said that the function of capital was to make profit and grow. Money locked up in a vault was not capital because it did not grow. If the owner converted it into a forest and a sawmill and bought labor power and made a profit on the operation, then the money would be capital. That meant that the men produced enough wealth to pay their own wages, to pay all other expenses and a certain sum over and above, which was profit.

Labor Power was bought in the cheapest market, its product sold in the dearest, so that the margin, the profit, should be the biggest possible. All schemes to raise the price of labor above the market price must fail just as schemes to raise the market price of other commodities failed. The owner of labor power was obliged to take the price offered and as the market was overstocked, the price would be low.

The speaker went on to deny the identity of interest between capital and labor. The capitalist was right when he said he had nothing to arbitrate. Mr. Dunsmuir had the right and privilege to cut off his man’s bread and butter because he owned the mines and they had no kick coming because they had voted him that power.

The speaker denied that there was any difference between the Liberals and Conservatives and that it was a real fight between them. Both stood for the same thing, profits for the master and wages for the slave. They might differ about tariffs and the methods of opening up resources. It was not necessary to open up additional resources because enough had already been opened up to provide enough for all. Were any of them anxious to go and open up any more resources which would not be theirs when they had opened them up? All they got out of opening up resources was their board. The alien agitator was not as dangerous as the capitalist. The former could not exploit them, but the latter would take their hearts’ blood out of them. All they would get would be a little more toil and sweat and board themselves while they did it. Their wages could not be raised by legislation. The market ruled supreme. Every town lived upon the wages of the workers. When wages were cut down the businessmen felt the pinch. Yet these little tin horns were against the men when they entered into a contest for a better wage. The small merchant was doomed. It was on the docket that he should be wiped out and join the ranks of the wage slaves. The small farmer was squeezed by the transportation and other trusts, who took from him all the traffic would bear. The capitalists were confiscating the property of the workers as fast as it was produced. The capitalist class came to them and asked for their ballots because they could not get on without them. All legislation was class legislation. That which was for the capitalist was against the worker, and vice versa, and that was why labor acts were not enforced. Capital never produced any wealth. Capital was surplus value taken from labor without labor getting anything for it. All that the capitalist ever did was to make trouble for the labor class. The working class was the only useful class on top of the earth. Capitalist property was property in the workers, and the mills and the mines were merely the title of that property. The interest of the working class was the collective ownership and operation of the instruments of wealth production. If they would be free they must vote for that. That was the mission, the splendid mission, of the working class. Let them weigh, consider and decide for themselves. (Applause).

The Chairman having asked for questions from the audience, Mr. Nicholson denied that there had been any mud-slinging on the part of the Conservative Party during the campaign.

Mr. Kingsley said that if that were so it was greatly to their credit. (Applause).

He was not sure that it was absolutely true, but he was willing to admit that they had done less than the other party. The two local papers were an example. The Free Press had not done any mud-slinging but the Herald had done nothing else and while it accused the Socialists of lying, slandering and vilification, that was the course it continually pursued.

Mr. Nicholson said that if all the profits were made from labor, why did not the capitalists keep all the idle men working and make more profits?

Mr. Kingsley replied that machinery of production could glut the market without employing all the available men.