The Czar of Russia squirms upon his throne, not because he is necessarily a bad man, but because he is the head and center of a condition of things which squeezes the life out of the people.  His subjects hurl infernal machines at the tyrant because he represents the system which oppresses them.  But the evil is far deeper than the throne, and cannot be remedied by striking the occupant of it-the throne itself must be rooted out and demolished.  So the Irish question has a more powerful motive to foment agitation and murder than the landlord and landlordism.  The landlord simply stands out as the representative of the real grievance.  To remove him would not remove the evil; agitation would not cease; murder would still stalk abroad at noonday. The real grievance is the false system which makes the landlord possible. The appropriation of the fertile acres of the soil of Ireland, which created and maintains a privileged class, a class that while performing no labor, wrings from the toiler, in the shape of rents, so much of the produce of his labor that he cannot on the residue support himself and those dependent upon him aggravates the situation.  It is this system which constitutes the real grievance and makes the landlord an odious loafer with abundant cash and the laborer a constant toiler always upon the verge of starvation.  Evidently, therefore, to remove the landlord and leave the system of land monopoly would not remove the evil.  Destroy the latter and the former would be compelled to go.

Herein lies the great social wrong which has turned the beautiful roses of freedom into thorns to prick the hands of the black men of the South; which made slavery a blessing, paradoxical as it may appear, and freedom a curse.  It is this great wrong which has crowded the cities of the South with an ignorant pauper population, making desolate fields that once bloomed “as fair as a garden of the Lord,” where now the towering oak and pine-tree flourish, instead of the corn and cotton which gladdened the heart and filled the purse.  It was this gigantic iniquity which created that arrogant class who have exhausted the catalogue of violence to obtain power and the lexicon of sophistry for arguments to extenuate the exceeding heinousness of crime.  How could it be otherwise?  To tell a man he is free when he has neither money nor the opportunity to make it, is simply to mock him.  To tell him he has no master when he cannot live except by permission of the man who, under favorable conditions, monopolizes all the land, is to deal in the most tantalizing contradiction of terms.  But this is just what the United States did for the black man.  And yet because he has not grown learned and wealthy in twenty years, because he does not own broad acres and a large bank account, people are not wanting who declare he has no capacity, that he is improvident by nature and mendacious from inclination.

FOOTNOTES: