sures. The aim should always be to seek for true principles, and for the measures which those principles demand, and to support men who will support the measures. In regard to the principles, we may keep aloof, to a great extent, from party strife; but the moment we undertake to carry out those principles by means of measures, we enter upon party ground, and must act, if we act at all, with a party, and for and against men. Away then with the cant against politics and party. You must take the world as you find it, reform it with such materials as you have, and in obedience to laws which a higher power than that of man enacts.

Nevertheless, into party strife this journal will enter no farther than to discuss in a calm and philosophic spirit the great principles of political science, and, as occasion demands, to point out in the same spirit the measures which are necessary to reduce those principles to practice. I regard the democratic party of this country not indeed as a perfect party, but as a true movement party, constituting the American division of the great movement party of the world. In coöperating with this party, I am sure that I am a fellow-laborer with the friends of Humanity, who, in France, Germany, Italy, England, are seeking to work out a greater good for the human race. We are all soldiers in the same grand army of progress, and may feel that we are a mighty host, and shall, whatever enemies we may have to encounter, ultimately gain a complete and decisive victory. But, if I enrol myself in the ranks of this party, it is not as a slave, but as a freeman. In proclaiming great principles, in discussing measures, in determining what ought to be done, I speak from my own heart and mind, as God gives me utterance.

I say I do not regard the democratic party as perfect. I see much to be done which it has not yet attempted. I own, I am not satisfied with the inequality in wealth, intelligence, and social position, which I see even in this land of equal rights. We are far

66

from having realized what I regard as true democratic equality. I struggle for a greater degree of equality, and I believe that it will one day be obtained. I look forward to a time when every man shall sit under his own vine and fig tree, with none to molest or make afraid; " when the relations of master and slave, and of proprietor and workman, or employer and employed, shall be unknown; when, instead of one man's working for another and receiving wages therefor, all men will be independent proprietors, working on their own capitals, on their own farms, or in their own shops. I am aware that this will seem to my wise countrymen a Utopian dream, and that not a few will look upon me for indulging such a dream as insane, and fit only for a madhouse, or as a rabid agrarian, against whom every man of substance should set his face. But all this moves me not. I think I see the tendency of modern civilization, and I think I am as able as my neighbors, who have hardly given a moment's serious thought to the subject, to judge of the practicability of my dream. As for rabid agrarianism, I pray my wise friends not to be too fast. Perhaps I may love my race as well as they, and feel as strong a desire as they for peace and good order. How do they know that I delight in strife? and how do they know that I do not see as clearly as they, that an arbitrary division of property is a scheme not to be countenanced? Nay, how know they that I have not examined all the schemes, which reformers have prepared for reorganizing society, as thoroughly as they have, and that I also reject them? Wait a moment, good people; you shall not be hurt. Be so indulgent as to bear in mind that I have only said, that I desire a certain order of things, and that I believe that it will one day be brought about; but when, or by what means, I have not said. For aught you know, I hold myself to be entirely ignorant of the means by which that order of things is to be introduced. I have brought forward no scheme for introducing it, and how know you that I have any scheme?

But you tell me such an order of things cannot be introduced. How know you that? Are you prophets? Then give me the proofs of your title to the prophetic character. Perhaps, if it come to prophesying, my commission to prophesy may be as good as yours. At any rate, admit it to be possible, that I may have a little common sense, as well as you a great deal. But if it can be brought about, you say, by what means? This is a question, and one which I cannot answer. I have no scheme of my own, and I pretend not to devise one. I have no plan of a world-reform for you to adopt, for I have not yet found one that I could adopt for myself. I have paid some attention to the schemes of world-reformers, from Plato down to Robert Owen and M. Fourier, but none of them seem to me of any great value. There is not one of them that I cannot easily convict of inadequacy to the end for which it is proposed.

If then I have no scheme for introducing this new and desirable order of things, you may ask me, why I broach the subject? Simply because it is very well when one starts on a voyage, that he should know the port he would make. If he knows not this, how shall he know what course to steer, or be able to determine whether he is sailing in a right direction or a wrong one? If we know not the end we would gain, how can we determine what should be the policy of government, whether this or that measure be good or bad? Say, for instance, we have a large amount of unoccupied lands. The question comes up, how shall we dispose of them? If the end to be sought is to make every man a proprietor, and a laborer on his own capital, then the answer is plain, that they should be disposed of in small parcels, and only to actual settlers, who will themselves perform the labor of cultivating them. And as it is desirable to have as many of these independent proprietors as possible, it follows that the lands should be disposed of at a low price; so that as many men as possible, of small means, may be induced to emigrate and purchase 3

VOL. III. NO. I.

them farms. Say the question concerning our factory system, as a permanent system, comes up. Ought government to encourage this system, and seek to fasten it on the country forever? What is the tendency of this system? To diminish the number of proprietors, and to increase the number of operatives at wages. Then it is hostile to the order of things we should seek to introduce. Then it ought not to be encouraged. This says nothing against manufactures; it merely condemns the present system, and teaches us that we should labor to make the operatives the owners of the factory. We may see from these two instances the necessity of clearly understanding the end we would gain; and therefore the propriety of discussing the question, What is the order of society we should labor to build up?

As to the method of bringing about the order of society I contemplate, I suppose I am not much wiser than other folks. Society is nothing but the reflex of human nature. You can have nothing in human society which is not in humanity. Humanity in all its integrity is in every individual. In every society then, however imperfect may be its actual state, you have all the elements of the most perfect state to which the human race can aspire. But these elements are imperfectly developed, or improperly compounded. This is the cause of the evils which exist. Your resort for a remedy is, therefore, to mind. You must examine society as it is, and see wherein it is defective; analyze human nature, ascertain its elements, and from these infer the perfection to which you may aspire. Some elements now are developed, and others are not; some elements are dominant which should be subservient, and vice versa. You must study to mould your institutions, so as gradually to develop what is undeveloped, and to bring up the elements of human nature, which are now in obscurity, and reduce to servitude others which have now improperly the mastery. This is to be done by means of education, the pulpit, the press, the lyceum, and

the legislature. You cannot create the order of things proposed, nor introduce it at once; you must develop it, and grow into it as best you can. Hereis my agrarianism, my recklessness.

If any are alarmed at it, why, God help them; I cannot.

Of literature proper, I have not much to say. place no value on literature for its own sake, and never make it an end to be sought. It deserves our attention only as a means of individual or social growth. The literary aim of this journal will be to breathe into our literature a free and elevated spirit, and to give it a democratic cast, a truly American direction. I would enlist literature on the side of the people, and secure all its influence to the cause of democracy.

In conducting this Review, I wish it to be understood that its contributors are under no obligation to conform to my sentiments and opinions. I have my own doctrines; those I shall always bring out and insist upon; for those, I shall hold myself responsible. But the Review is intended for all who sympathize with the movement party, for all who wish to see progress effected in politics, philosophy, literature, or religion. I am myself an eclectic, and I seek to carry the spirit of eclecticism into all the departments of life and thought; but the Transcendentalists, the Mystics, the Theosophists, the Idealists, may make this journal at all times, if they choose, their medium of communication with the public, as freely as if the editor was one of their own number.

As I open the Review to persons entertaining views which differ from my own, and, as I am not willing to be thought to advocate contradictory doctrines, my own articles will always bear my signature. For these articles the public may hold me responsible, but for none others. Contributors may annex their own names or not to their contributions, at their own option. I shall always exercise the editorial right to say what articles may or may not be inserted; but