Should such a rule be applied to-day, society in every land could disgorge with much advantage the men who ride the people as the Old Man of the Sea rode Sindbad the luckless sailor.

But our civilization is built upon a higher conception of individual right and immunity; there is now no limit to the right of one man to rob another of the produce of his labor or his natural and conferred rights.

Not only may individuals rob and plunder their fellows with absolute impunity, but our laws have put breath into that soulless thing which has become notoriously infamous as a "corporation." Around this thing, this engine of extortion and oppression, our laws have placed bulwarks which the defrauded laborer, the widow and orphan, and even the sovereign public, cannot overleap.

Here is where Monopoly first shows its cormorant head.
If millionaires are enemies of society, and I assume that they are--not because they have property, but because, as a rule, they have acquired it by unjust processes and use it tyrannically--what excuse have we for aristocracies, an idle class, a privileged class, who toil not, nor spin?
What is a recognized aristocracy, such as England maintains?
From what perennial fountain did it draw its nobility and wealth?
Came they not through Norman conquest and robbery?
Who pay the heavy taxes levied upon the people to support the privileged classes of England?
The royal revenues and princely preserves, are they not supported out of the sweat of the poorer classes, upon whom all the burdens of society fall at last?
And why should there be royal revenues and princely preserves?
Do they add anything to the wealth of a nation or the happiness of a people?
Let us see.
Brassey (Sir Thomas), in his book on _Work and Wages_, p.

71, says: The Irish Poor Law Commissioners stated that the average produce of the soil in Ireland was not much above one half the average produce in England, whilst the number of laborers employed in agriculture was, in proportion to the quantity of land under cultivation more than double, viz.: as five to two.