A Remembrance of John S. Crosby
Joseph Dana Miller
[Reprinted from the Single Tax Review,
July-August 1915]
We knew John S. Crosby as a great orator; we had not learned to
esteem him as a profound thinker. We now know that those "glorified
words" which delighted Mr. Crosby's hearers really proceeded from
a colder and more calculating analysis of principles than we had
assumed him familiar with. Those winged utterances which exercised so
potent an influence over his listeners, an influence we attributed to
his manly beauty, his speaking countenance, his dramatic art, we now
see borrowed not a little of the power they carried to his many hours
of thoughtful contemplation of the problems of human society, of all
problems the profoundest save those of the soul's destiny. We now see
how persistently he had thought, how earnestly he had endeavored to
master those principles which on the platform he translated into
flashing thunders of eloquence which made him one of the great orators
of the time, and perhaps the greatest in a movement already noted for
the number and character of its platform figures.
In the argument of this little work [The Orthocratic State]
Mr. Crosby contends for the doctrine of natural rights; the primary
right is the right of self-defence, and to this right may be traced
the origin of the State. The State is organized, not for the
self-defence of the individual against aggression but to compel all
persons to refrain from peace-disturbing self-defence. One must follow
this somewhat novel theory and the reasoning by which it is buttressed
with care, for from it Mr. Crosby educes the nature and function of
the State, what it must do and what it must not be permitted to do.
That the State exists only to conserve the natural rights of the
individual, that it cannot do legitimately or with warrant what
society itself cannot do, and that it cannot justly prevent the
exercise of any primary right, is the crux of the contention.
Not all Single Taxers will agree with all the conclusions that Mr.
Crosby draws from his premise. Some will not regard the creation of
artificial persons or corporations, to serve what may be regarded as a
useful expedient, as wholly invasive. Nor does it seem to us that his
argument against the right of property in an invention will stand the
strict test of analysis of a true right of property. There may arise
great difficulties of administering and conserving such right but
those who contend for the principle of the right of an inventor to his
pro- duct are more nearly in line with the true economic doctrine of
reward for service than those who on any ground seek to question it.
But these are minor blemishes, if blemishes they are. Mr. Crosby has
established successfully the true nature of the State; he has shown
the slow progress of the arts of Government toward the scientific
stage; he has shown the many misconceptions of the nature of the
State; and he has declared, in a notable sentence, "What we ought
to do is to be learned not so much from the study of history as from
that common sense upon which we rely in forming our judgments of
history."
Frankly, we were not prepared for so searching an examination as Mr.
Crosby has furnished us. It is clear that if greater leisure had been
given him he might have contributed much that the best thought of the
world would not willingly have permitted to perish. It is a precious
momento that he has left us in the ripened thought of a really
profound student of the problems which as Single Taxers chiefly
concern us.
The dedication adds a personal note which will touch many of those
who have felt that bond of 83rmpathy and fellowship with which our
departed friend inspired those who were privileged to know him
intimately. "To John J. Murphy, Lawson Purdy, Chas. H. Ingersol
and William Lustgarten, but for whose kind offices it might not have
been published, this booklet is affectionately dedicated (in an hour
of physical darkness)."
|