The Daily Worker Newspaper, March 7, 1927, Page 6

THE DAILY WORKER, NEW YORK, MONDAY, MARCH 7, 1927 Ruthenberg, in 1920, Told | Why U. S. Marines Would March in Shanghai in 1927 By J. LOUIS ENGDAHL. T ing ¢! on shbenay: of the gr to the American work- HERE were two p nterest and sions nificance est On t other Shan; , China, 1,200 America » ships aumont and Pecos, mar r blatantly with blast of bugle corp: s bands, thru the streets of the seaport, one of the largest in the whole world. In Chicago, there another march, the quiet tread of thousands of wor of C, E. Ruthen- berg, paying their tribute @ o ad not only strug- gled, but led in the struggle for their release from | oppression. They had come to do him honor. There is some conne: between the two processions. | | The march of the we in Chicago is the counter- march to “The Parade” in Shangha‘ aged as an Amer- ican imperia threatening gesture ag t the work- ers of the Or The strength of the | of march of workers who looked to Ruthenberg for guidance spells | the weak of Wall Street’s militarist display against | the peop! hat American imperialism would subject to its exploitation. | The kept pre: Tagua and ot sands of m: American | demandec perfect! All else mitted th ss argues for China, as in Mexico, Nica- | lands that many battleships and aon | es are ordered to their posts ta “Protect | and “defend American interests.” It is | the heart-beat of frantic pay-triotism be | ed to the rolling drumbeat of roaring war. m. Boldly and bravely, Ruthenberg com- on to American imperialism, Concretely | it was for trying to halt the march of the Americdn} dollar’s marines in Shanghai in 1927, that Ruthenberg | was ordered to prison in New York City, in 1920. * # * In the spirit of Leninism, Ruthenberg had analyzed be- | ‘fore an astonished jury, a vicious prosecutor and a harlot, | red-baiting judge, the development of imperialism, where | it was leading and why. It was the clearest explanation | of the Communist position that had been made up to} that time under similar conditions in this country. The capitalist overlords must needs hide the truth from | the people, so that it would be possible to send marines | into every foreign land to support the aggressions of the dollar. That was why they sent Ruthenberg to prison. But that did not still his voice. Nor will death silence it. For his voice takes on added volume as new Masses of workers rally to the cause which he cham- | pioned. * * “What is imperialism or imperialist capitalism?” asked I. E. Ferguson, on trial with Ruthenberg before | *the notorious Judge Bartow S. Weeks. Ferguson is a} lawyer and acted as one of Communist counsel. Ruthen- berg, before capitalist judge and prosecutér and in face | of a hostile jury, gave clear answer: | “Imperialism is that stage of the development of cap- | italism when the state becomes the agent of the cap-| italist class in seeking avenues of investment, avenues of | exploitation, vy materials and in any other form of capitalist action. It is that period of capitalism when, | thru the development of the capitalist system, the per- | fection of the machinery of production, the surplus in a country has taken on a certain character, that of the ex- portation of steel or iron, and making the requirement | to secure markets for the use of this material, for the | disposal of this material. “In this effort to secure markets for the sale of these | materials unexploited territories are sought and the gov- | ernments become the agents of the capitalists in securing | concessions, securing opportunities for investment, which, | in turn, create the market for the sale of these product: Then the court record contains the following, Ferguson | questioning Ruthenberg: “Q. Will you explain the statement, at what stage such | a development occurs? A. The development of capital- | ism itself brings about the perfection of the machinery: of production; the drawing of the workers from agricul-| tural pursuits into industry, the tending toward the pro- | duction of a certain character of commodity, and that is| iron and steel goods. . “Q. You mean machinery? A. Machinery also, yes. “Q. Railroads? A. The material for railroads. “Q. Is that a stage in which the surplus cannot be in- | ¥ested in the whole country? A. Yes, the tendency of | capitalist production is that with the creation of greater | and greater surplus, the returns of capital invested in| the home industry become less, and necessarily the cap- | italists seek other avenues of investment where the re- turns will be greater. They seek the unexploited terri- tory. They seek the countries which have not been de- veloped, such as Mexico or China, or part of South Amer- ica, and invest---seek concegsidns there and invest their capital for larger and quicker returns, and these invest- ments take the form of se eevee of that territory thru the building of railrod@s, which create the market | for the sale of the produéts of the home country. “Q. What is the essential element that makes this process imperialistic, as you use the term? A. The in- tervention of the government or the state as an agency of the capitalist class to secure these concessions and to protect their investment. “Q. Can you make that more specific? A. Well, we| have had as an {Ilustration in our relations with Mexico, where millions of American capital are invested, and where we have been in constant conflict with the various Mexican governments over the protection of these in-| vestments. “We find at the beginning of the war in 1914, that there had developed during the preceding decades the imperialist Panes in all the great capitalist nations; notably in England and in Germany. “The struggle for cor the struggle for what | we now might call ‘mandator ’ or colonies, had been going on for a long term of 3. We found repeatedly that the governments came in conflict with cach other, as for instance, France and Germany over Morocco. The questions at stake were questions as to which country Bhould,have the right to exploit this unexploited, unde- veloped territory. These conflicts in which the govern- ments fought the battles, thru diplomacy, of the cap- italist class, reflected the imperialist process, the devel- opment of imperialism, the securing of these concessions for the benefit of the home capitalist. “IT IS OUT OF THIS PROCESS THAT THE WAR DEVELOPED. {T is OUT OF THIS PROCESS THAT OTHER WARS WILL DEVELOP IN THE FUTURE, | FROM THE STANDPOINT OF SOCIALIST ANAL- YSIS.” * Let American labor take note of this warning now. Those who accept the principles that Ruthenberg sought to bring to the attention of the American working class will increase. Support of American marines marching thru the streets of Shanghai will thus be withdrawn. Aid thrown on the side of the Chinese workers and peas- ants will increase and support their struggle, like Amer- iean labor's, for liberation from the same enslaving im- jalist system that seeks to shackle the whole world in its profit-making service. Ruthenberg gave his life to help free the world’s bday of those shackles. 4 % * WHILE CAPITALIST PARASITES ON THE SURPLUS Warner ARE HUNO enworen | THEIR THEY ARE SLUGGED BY HIRED ThuGS, STRIREBREAKERS AND POLICE PRobUCT OF MTERS DRIVEN IN LUXURIOUS SPLENDOR INDUSTRIAL, WORKER ex dive THE e HEM, GEFE THEY ARE Snor re FULL OF pope By THE KEPT CHuRen AND PRESS, THEY ARE muriaten oR KULED IN IMPERIALIST WARS — i = AND MEET AT LAST THE ALMSMoUSE OR PAUPERS GRAVE, ANEW NOVER Goa Sinclair So three days’ later a_ little pageant wound its way to the top of one of the hills of Paradise, There was a crowd on hand, and a truck with the necessary radio apparatus—never were any of the | precious words of Eli lost nowa- days; the two hundred thousand radio housewives of California had been notified by the newspapers, and a hundred and ninety thousand of them had put off their market- ing to hear his romantic funeral service. Bunny and Rachel and a handful of the reds stood to one side, knowing they were not wel- come. Ruth stood near the grave with the weeping family, having on each side of her a sturdy oil worker—her two brothers-in-law, Andy Bugner and Jerry Black— because she had been violent on oc- easions, and no one knew what she might do. She was white and fear- ful in looks, but seemed not to realize the meaning of the big hole dug in the ground, or of the long black box covered with flowers. While Eli was preaching his fervid sermon about the prodigal son who returned, and about the strayed lamb which was found, Ruth stood »| gazing at the white clouds moving slowly behind the distant hill-tops. She would make them no more trouble. All she wanted was to wander over these hills, and call now and then for the sheep which were no longer there. Sometimes she called Paul, and sometimes she called: Bunny, and so they let her wander; until one day she went calling Joe Gundha. The oil work- ers who were putting up the new derricks and cleaning out the burned wells to put them back ‘on production were new men to the Ross Junior tract—it is the Roscoe Junior tract’ now, by the way, one of Vernon Roscoe’s four sons being in charge of the job. These new men had neyer heard about the “roughneck” who had fallen into the discovery well, so they paid no attention to the unhappy girl who wandered here and there calling his name. It was not till ae that night, when Ruth was missing, and the family making a search, that some one told of hearing her call Joe Gundha. Meelie remembered right away, and they put down a hook in the discovery well, which was having to be drilled again, and they brought up a piece of Ruth’s dress; so they put down a three- pronged grab, and brought up the rest of her, and Eli came again, and they buried her alongside Paul, and with Joe Gundha not far awny. You can see those graves, with a picket fence about them, and no dorrick for a hundred feet or more. Some day all those uniovely der- ricks will be gone, and so will the picket fence and the graves, There will be other girls with bare brown legs running over those hills, and they may grow up to be. happier women, if men can find some way to chain the black and cruel demon which killed Ruth Watkins and her brother—yes, and Dad also; an evil Power which roams the earth, crippling the bodies of men and women, and luring the nations to destruction by visions of unearned wealth, and the opportunity to en- slave and exploit labor. The End To Fight Divorce. PARIS, March 6,—Prince Galitzine, fifth husband of Aimee Crocker Gour- and, formerly of Sacramento, Cali- | fornia, has employed a lawyer and informed his wife he plans to fight her divorce action, according to Le Journal. | Most of Us | Die Poor | | | IE LEVEN persons out of a hundred pass on to their heavenly reward, bequeath less than $500 to their heirs and thereby enable actuaries |and advertising agents to display the |soul and money-saving virtues of | life insurance. Read further and weep—ten leave |from $500 to $1,000; twenty from $1,000 to $2,500; and eighteen from | $2,500 to $5,000; about fifteen out of the hundred will leave estates valued | from $1,000 to $25,000, and between | five and six will bequeath estates | valued at from 25,000 to $50,000. | These figures are supplied by a re- eent survey made by the -Federal | Trade Commission, The records were | compiled from the reports of twenty- |four “sample” counties throughout the United States, covering a period | of twelve years. Exploiters Come High. Watch the mass of insurance ad- (By NAT KAPLAN.) vertising that will be released short- | ly, conveying the above dread infor- | mation. How does the value of your life compare with that of the fol- lowing noted Americans? Rodman Wanamaker is insured for $7,500,000. He was the first man to | apply for more than a $1,000,000 pol- | iey. That was, twenty years ago. | Now there are between 200 and 300 | policies in foree for one million dol- |lars and over. William Fox carries | a round six million dollars worth. S. |S. Kresge, J. L. Lasky, Adolph Zukor | ang Marcus Loew carry $5,000,000. | John Bowman and Ralph Jonas are {in the $4,000,000 class. Movie Star's Hides Precious. son are insured for $2,000,000 each, | Norma Talmadge for $1,250,000, and | Constance Talmadge, Buster Keaton, | Charlie Chaplin, Mary Pickford, | Douglas Fairbanks, Eric von Stro- janl Cecil DeMille are insured for $1,- 000,000 each. Red Grange was in-| | sured for a half million while making a picture, and Marion Talley recent- ly took out a similar amount. So if one can’t pass a screen test the best bet is either banking, singing or pro- fessional football. Three policies exceeding one mil- lion dollars were paid out in 1925, according to the National Under- writers of February 21. Figures for | 1925 are the latest available. The | largest claim paid was for $1,767,000 |to the estate of Solomon Rosenbloom, | deceased Pittsburgh banker. Horace Saks was insured for $1,201,000 and | Julius Fleischmann was the third | policy-holder to die in 1925 with more | than one million dollars in insurance. |His policies were for $1,049,249. These three men were under sixty | and all died suddenly. Lots of Prosperity. The insurance companies of Amer- | iea had one of their best years in 1925, the year under review. They | paid out $1,541,016,000, exclusive of the $48,618,490 paid by the United States Veterans’ Bureau. The dread lesson conveyed in the findings of the Federal Trade Com- mission will doubtless increase the saleability of insurance, and sons of Eli, John Harvard, Princeton, et al, will find an answer to their quest for a life work embracing Profit and Service and rally under the stand- ards of the anxiously waiting insu- rance companies. The few who are sadly left behind may find consola- tion in other typically American pro- fessions—advertising, bond-selling or chiropractic. Save One Out of Twenty-one. LONDON, March 6. — The Greek steamer Stenies foundered off Lands- end in the recent storm. One survivor of the crew of twenty | was picked up by a French fishing vessel after c'inging for sixtecn hours te an upturned life boat. John Barrymore and Gloria Swan- | |heim, June Mathis, Richard Thomas | Barnard---An Invitation! ‘HREE women politicians addressed a gathering of yomen. Thirteenth Assembly, N. Y., ‘District women voters and Barnard college girls—to be exact. They came to give the women and girls advice—and they “delivered the goods.” When men politicians talk to men voters—especially to aspiring young college students, they try to show them that by starting at the bottom, they can “work” their “way up” until they land in the White House. But girls? Women? They cannot become presidents; therefore, the only stimulating advice one can give them is: do the little chores and, bye and bye, you will become big politicians with big salaries—even as the Tammany bosses or the leaders of the G. O. P. The Barnard girls, therefore, were told to “start at the bottom, lick stamps and mail letters” if they would ever hope to become successful careerists in politics. Miss Sarah Schuyler Butler, daughter of Columbia’s | ultra-reactionary president—whose, future is secure, so long as the men and women of the working class remain the slaves of capitalism, was one of the speakers. She urged the ladies present to “study polities” by “reading the daily newspapers.” Needless to say, she did not in- clude the latest daily to appear on the newsstands, The DAILY WORKER. She urged each of her hearers to “join gome political party” and “learn its machinery.” She made no mention of the Workers Party, of course: Neither did Mrs. Henry Moscowitz—who got her training from the workers of the lower East Side and has used it to climb nimbly up the Tammany Circus ladder; nor Mrs. Charles L. Tiffany, who is “regional director of the First Region of the Non- Partisan League of Women Voters,” and who, no doubt, cares very little as to whether one or another of the bourgeois parties keeps capitalism in power. None of the three speakers made mention of the class- struggle and:no fourth speaker was invited to present the program of the Workers Party. This is the reason why I have taken the liberty of writing the chairman of that meeting, inviting some of the Barnard students through him to come to the March 8th meeting at Cen- tral Opera House, where they will learn something about the work of non-careerist Communist men and women whose ideal is not a big fat job but the privilege of or- ganizing the housewives and factory women together with the men of the working class. My letter follows: Mr. Raymond C. Moley, Barnard College, New York, N. Y. March 2, 1927. My dear Mr. Moley; I note with interest the report of a méeting on March first over which you presided, held before Barnard stu- dents and addressed by several women representing the two main political parties and a “non-partisan” political organization. I write you in the hope you will agree that no meeting truly represents all sides politically which does not in- clude a speaker from the Workers (Communist) Party. There must be, without a doubt, a fair percentage of stu- dents at Barnard who would find the Communist mes- sage of vital interest. Had a Workers Party speaker been invited, I am sure that these students would have come away with the impression that Barnard is a live institution, after all. However, the moment is past. theless, bring to the attention of the Barnard students the meeting to be held on March 8th at the Central Opera House in celebration of International Women’s Day? Perhaps, you as chairman of the March first meeting will make up for the oversight by calling the students’ attention to this international celebration. Those stu- dents who come from poor homes—whose working class parents, or brothers and sisters, have had to make untold sacrifices to send them to college—are perhaps still making sacrifices to keep them there, will find the meet- ing on March 8th a thrilling, unforgettable experience. There, the speeches will inspire them to make sacrifices in turn for the organization of millions of working women for whom the “higher education” is impossible under capitalism. There, they will feel not the bourgeois lure of a personal political career, but the call to take part in the political organization and enlightenment of | There, they may be invited to join the; Workers’ School—to vitalize their “dead” knowledge | these millions. gained in the higher institutions of bourgeois education. They may be asked at the March 8th meeting to “lick stamps and send out letters.” But these letters would not help them ultimately to become advisers “to the Gov- ernor” at fat salaries. The chances are these letters would be a call to workers to fight Capitalism, fight Im- perialism—and, so far from leading them to fat pay en-| velopes might ultimately lead them to long terms in jail. | ! Yet I think some of them would answer the call “to lick | stamps and address envelopes” under even these risky conditions—because they are proletarian at heart and need but to hear and understand our message to respond. If you yourself are of proletarian origin—if you your- self secretly chafe at your intellectual enslavement, I feel confident that you will do what you can to help cor- rect the meeting of March first by sending a strong proletariag contingent of Barnard students to the meet- ing of March 8th—the women’s day celebration—a day celebrated throughout the world by the Communist Parties, sections of the Communist International. Thanking you for any service you may render the worker students of Barnard, believe me, prouder of in- dictments than of diplomas. (Signed) ROSE PASTOR STOKES. 133 West 15th Street. March 2, 1927. SLAYING THE BEA‘? But may I not, never- | of Literature It may be that the Literary Guild which was recently formed is a genu- ine venture in cooperation; it may be, on the other hand, just a bright business idea. In any event its bene- fits to the workers of this country are quite dubious. There is no doubt that this organi- zation will cut down the prices of certain books. One must remember that the entrenched’ publishers are making a vigorous fight against the Guild. But that does not mean that the average workers of the United States can hope to discover any vital literature through the guardianship of this organization. The United Cigar Idea. The Literary Guild is distributing a persuasive little booklet entitled “Wings,” which explains the hopes, origins and frustrations of the organ- ization to date. of New York and the book guilds of Europe are group to illustrate the sources of their inspiration. “It is.a modern way of getting books—based on mo- dern ideas of selection, manufacture and distribution.” Specifically, each member of the Guild ($18 yearly) will be entitled to 12 books “carefully selected by a board of distinguished editors at one-half the bookstore These will be mailed directly to the subscribers, one volume being pub- lished each month. There are two things that are of fundamental interest to us:.(1) Is the selection committee of the Guild likely to choose books of exceptional value or even of merit? (2) As- suming that their judgment is honest, sound, and discerning, will |the books which they select be of in- | terest and value to the members of} | the working class of America? { Carl Van Doren, former literary editor of The Nation, and at one time with the Century Magazine is the Editor-in-Chief of the committee which will select both books already published (which will be purchased in consignments of 20,000) and also original manuscripts. The other members are Glenn Frank, Zona Gale, Joseph Wood Krutch, Hendrik Willem Van Loon, and Elinor Wylie. Colorless Candidates. Those who are slighly familiar with the technique of nominating a candidate for President of the United States or of selecting a book and an author upon whom to bestow the dis- | tinction of the Pulitzer Prize will | understand that the Literary Guild will probably be faced with similar difficulties, It is obvious that the which show unusual merit but rather those about which the majority of wholesome, clean-minded and patri- otic Americans can become enthu- siastic. “Down with the wall between writer and reader” is the slogan of The Literary Guild: Guardian Angels The Theatre Guild} cited by the present} prices.” | books selected will be not those | By SENDER GARLIN the Literary Guild. This is rather cold consolation, we fear. “The Best People.” In an efofrt to impress the public with the authority of the members of the board of editors, the profes- sional interests and activities of the individual members are cited. “What they are” and “Associations” are the two items under which this is ac- complished. Elinor Wylie, for ex- ample, is described as a novelist, es- sayest, and poet. Her “associations” are listed as The New Republic. The New Yorker, and the New York Her- ald Tribune. And Hendrik William Van Loon, after beihg described pro- fessionally as a historian, cartoonist, and journalist, his associations are cited as Cornell University, Antioch College, the Associated Press and the Woman’s Home Companion. Middle-class ‘Culture”. | We are not here concerned primar- ily with the question as to whether the sponsors of the organization are trying to make money or not,—or even if the books which they dis- cover will be good and interesting reading. This-much, however, is un- disputed: the bit of super-salesman- ship called “Wings” clearly labels the Literary Guild ‘at best as a. nice, amiable, middle-class movement to. “bring culture to the people.” -And the kind of “culture” that will be brought forth will unquestionably be the kind that Glenn Frank, one of the honored members of the Editorial Board, is palming off each day in his syndicated capsules of profes- sional optimism entitled “Life’s Worth Living” in the New York Eve- ning World. No, Thanks! | The working class of America jmust create its own literature, It must develop its own teachers. The “hand-me-down” culture of the lei- sure class is something that we must look upon as a positive menace. The clear-seeing members of the working class have repudiated the spurious economic theory of John R. Com- mons, of the University of Wisconsin, because it is clearly an apology for the capitalist system. In the same way must be repudiated the spurious guardianship of Glenn Frank of the University of Wisconsin and Elinor Wylie (Washington society lady) in the field of literature. It is not sufficient to remove the wall between the writer and reader, even if the Literary Guild can do that, What is more vital is to de- stroy: the wall between literature and industry—to make of writers not members of a patronising, parasitic class, but to increase the articulate- ness of the workers of the world. This cannot be done by” aiding this scheme of a group of benevolent members of the upper middle-class in their efforts to critically brow- beat them in their choice of current books. : _ Sure Thing By SPECTATOR. about ‘the professional prize ring are the big money men among the country’s professional gamblers. They are not gamblers in the literal sense of the word, for they take no chances. The term, fixers, might be more aptly used. The transition, carrying boxing from its more or less romantic past to its present eminence as a busi- ness, is in keeping with the develop- ment of other great American indus- tries. Corruption, greed, duplicity and what have you mark it with the stamp of Big Business. The pro- fessional game is as edifying, as wholesome as a black-jacking. Suggestion of Rottenness. A glance at a few fairly recent bouts will indicate that there is more than a faint suggestion of rotten- ness, that, in fact, the “sport” stinks. It will be observed that despite the prediction of sports writers, shipping clerks and other sports experts, the real wise guys are the gamblers or fixers, On June 5, 1925, Tunney knocked out Tom Gibbons in the twelfth round of their bout at the Polo Grounds. Gibbons had stayed the limit with the champion, Dempsey, and had never been knocked out. He was generally conceded to be a harder hitter and cleverer than Tunney, but wise money was placed on Tunney acd Gene won. A somewhat similar situ- ation obtained in the present cham- pion’s knockout of the iron-man, Bartley Madden, who had stayed the limit with Harry Wills although bad- ly beaten in every one of the fifteen rounds. Tunney was being system- atically built up into a position as the leading contender, Made a Killing. The present champion’s set-to with Jack Dempsey involved an upset so unexpected that it left a great audi- ence cold. But the wise money mén made a killing. Similarly, on, Feb- ruary 18, 1927, the Delaney-Maloney fight ‘at Madison Square Garden ended with Maloney, on the short end of 18 to 5 odds, the victor. The above examples present a cer- tain finesse, leaving a little room for an “honest” difference of opinion. {Consider a few instances in which| ¥ ’ "THOSE who pull the strings in and Be * Sportsmen | there was out and out double cross- On July 23, 1925, Charley Rosen- berg kayoed Eddie Shea at the New York Velodrome in the fourth round. Although Shea was considered a top- of the gamblers went so far as to pick the fourth round as the one in which Rosenberg would win. Rosenberg Won. Later, on February 4, 1927, Rosen- berg was slated to meet a tartar in the. person of Bushy Graham. The “experts” figured that Rosenberg would be greatly weakened by his hectic efforts to make the weight. But Rosenberg came in overweight, forfeited a neat sum of money and his title ‘and handily defeated Grah- am. The suckers, who had expected him to come in as a bantam, bet on Graham. Rosenberg was suspended for one year by the boxing commis- sion, On September 21, 1925, Dave Shade met Mickéy’ Walker for the welter- weight title, at the Yankee Stadium. So clear was Shade’s superiority over Walker that some bettors tried to hedge in in the late rounds by offering odds on Shade. Walker was given the decision. His “victory” over Tiger Flowers was later the subject of a municipal | investigation in Chicago. The usual whitewashing was applied. , Going back to December 17, 19: when Johnny Dundee received the cision against Jack Bernstein, af the latter had carried almost e' round, it should be noted’ that, the two judges who shared in this ict ire not officiated in this stat then. fy ie Officials Suspended. ° On September if, 1925, Phil Kap- lin was a 8 to 1 favorite over Willie Harmon. They were vpparently evenly matched, Harmon itad a wide margin, but the decision was a draw. The two officials who voted that way were suspénded, On November ‘, 1925, Charley Rosen was given the decisien in his bout with Lucien Viney. ‘The latter was clearly the victor, and two offi- cials who contribute! to this looting: of suckers were suspended. It’s a great game, as typically . pi as the Harding aoe tion, icago a ork dramatie art. notcher in the bantam division, some . since / @ |