💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › josiah-warren-narrative-of-practical-experiments.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 11:38:05. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Narrative of Practical Experiments
Author: Josiah Warren
Date: 1872
Language: en
Topics: intentional communities, United States of America
Source: Retrieved on October 7, 2011 from https://web.archive.org/web/20111007013416/http://www.crispinsartwell.com/warrennarrative.htm
Notes: Together, passages from The Quarterly Letter and Practical Applications [of True Civilization] embody the final version of a project that Warren assayed many times: a record of his experiments in equitable commerce and self-sovereign community.

Josiah Warren

Narrative of Practical Experiments

I. New Harmony and the Time Store Idea

This is a passage from The Quarterly Letter: Devoted to Showing the

Practical Applications and Progress of Equity, a Subject of Serious to

All Classes, but Most Immediately To the Men and Women of Labor and

Sorrow! Vol 1, No. 1 (dated October, 1867).

(Text obtained from the Labadie Collection, University of Michigan.)

The Quarterly Letter, like the Periodical Letter, and The Peaceful

Revolutionist, was one-off or extremely occasional periodical, entirely

written, set, and printed by Warren. The typesetting and printing is

notable: extremely elaborate and relatively free of errors; the

aesthetic is clunky but somehow sweet. This, of which I obtained the

text from the Labadie Collection at Michigan, is more or less the

entirety of the Quarterly Letter, vol. 1 no 1, datelined “Cliftondale,

Mass., October 1867.” Oddly, it tells Warren’s story of disillusionment

with Owen and realization of his principles in a semi-fictitious way; he

calls himself “Werner.”

This may be the best mature statement of Warren’s philosophy or at least

Werner’s anarchism — with continuous attempts at practical demonstration

— and it displays emerging awareness that the conflict between labor and

capital was in some ways fundamental to the late nineteenth century and

to the ideological configuration of the progressive movements of that

era.

This piece narrates the beginning of the Time Store idea, and is

certainly the clearest description of the operation. With Practical

Applications of the Elementary Positions of True Civilization (to

follow), it forms a continuous narrative of Warren’s practical

implementations of his ideas.

Introductory

It has come to be admitted by the best students of human affairs, that

something is wrong at the foundation. That the history of the past is

mainly made up of the failures of mankind in their efforts to make

themselves comfortable. That it devolves upon the present generation to

solve the problem of successful society, or become the pivot upon which

civilization shall take a sudden turn toward barbarism. Whoever

undertakes this solution, assumes too grave a responsibility in putting

forth any abstract theory, but we are safe in stating facts in detail,

leaving each mind to theorize for itself. This course is preferred in

this work: beginning with the practical and letting theory follow.

A complete history of the experiments in Equity during the last forty

years would be too voluminous — to expensive to publish or to be read by

those who most need it. But selected parts will be given showing how

justice has been done to labor, in store keeping, in exchanging all

kinds of products, and services, renting of houses, buying and selling

land, &c.,: what kind of money has been used and how it has worked; how

the interests of all classes are made to co-operate by a principle

without entangling partnerships or partial, conflicting and short lived

combinations or organizations: and showing how competition is converted

into being a regulator rather than a destroyer, how destitute and

despairing people have been relieved by justice instead of charity:

enabling thinkers to see how distress can be relieved and the existing

and threatened conflicts between the luxurious and the starving may be

neutralized or averted: all without seriously disturbing any class or

person.

Labor for Labor: Its Origin and the Way it Worked

One whom we will call Werner, went to New Harmony, in Indiana in 1825,

with the celebrated philanthropist Robert Owen, who assembled eight

hundred people, mostly selected for their superior intelligence and

moral excellence, with the view of solving the great problem by

communism of property. Mr. Owen and one of his coadjutors (Mr. Maclure)

had an abundance (millions) of money and all felt an enthusiastic

devotion to the cause and unlimited confidence in Mr. Owen, but all

ended in disappointment. Two years time and at least two hundred

thousand dollars were spent in making and breaking up organizations,

constitutions, laws and governments of every conceivable kind, for no

result except to show what will not work, and that it is dangerous to

risk much in untried theories, how ever plausible they may appear.

In one of Mr. Owen’s lectures, he spoke of an idea that had been

broached in England. It was a proposal to exchange all labors or

services equally, hour for hour, with labor notes for a circulating

medium. But the idea did not seem to make much impression and it passed

away without any attempt at its development.

At the very commencement of our experiments in communism we were taken

all aback by phenomena altogether unexpected.

We had assured ourselves of our unanimous devotedness to the cause and

expected unanimity of thought and action: but instead of this we met

diversity of opinions, expedients and counteraction entirely beyond any

thing we had just left behind us in common society. And the more we

desired and called for union, the more this diversity seemed to be

developed: and instead of that harmonious co-operation we had expected,

we found more antagonisms than we had been accustomed to in common life.

If we had demanded or even expected infinite diversity, disunion and

disintegration we should have found ourselves in harmony with the facts

and with each other on one point at least. We differed, we contended and

ran ourselves into confusion: our legislative proceedings were just like

all others, excepting that we did not come to blows or pistols; because

Mr. Owen had shown us that all our thoughts, feelings and actions were

the inevitable effects of the causes that produce them; and that it

would be just as rational to punish the fruit of a tree for being what

it is, as to punish each other for being what we are: that our true

issue is not with each other, but with causes.

Every few days we heard of the failure of some one of the many

communities that had been started in different parts of this and other

countries. Small groups of selected friends had moved out of the town

upon the surrounding lands, each confident that they could succeed

though all others failed; but a very few weeks or months found them

returning to the town discouraged.

We had fairly worn each other out by incessant legislation about

organizations, constitutions, laws and regulations all to no purpose,

and we could no longer talk with each other on the subject that brought

us there. Many intelligent and far-seeing members had left — others were

preparing to go, and an oppressive despondency hung heavily upon all.

Werner shared the general feeling and nothing saved him from despair but

that our business is with causes: and the question now was, what could

be the causes of all this confusion and disappointment? What was the

matter, when all were so willing to sacrifice so much for success? He

dwelt upon this question till he could come to no other conclusion than

that communism was the cause. What then was to be done? Must we give up

all hope of a successful society? Or must we attempt to construct

society without communism? for all societies, from a nation to the

smallest partnership, are more or less communistic.

We had carried communism farther than usual and hence our greater

confusion. Common society, then, had all the time been right in its

individual ownership of property and its individual responsibilities and

wrong in all its communistic entanglements. Even two children owning a

jack knife together are liable to continual dissatisfaction and

disturbance till somebody owns it individually. Had society, then,

started wrong at the beginning? Had all its governments and other

communistic institutions been formed on a wrong model? Was

disintegration, then, not an enemy but a friend and a remedy? Was

“individuality” to be the watch word of progress instead of “union”?

Werner dwelt upon these thoughts day and night, for he could not dismiss

them and was almost bewildered with the immense scope of the subject and

the astounding conclusions that he could not avoid: but he had become so

distrustful of his own judgment from his late disappointments, he

resolved to dismiss these thoughts and leave these great problems to be

solved and settled by the wise, the great and the powerful. But he could

not dismiss them; they haunted him; they haunted him, day and night.

They presented to him society beginning anew. He found himself asking

how it should begin. It could not be formed, for wee had just proved,

for we had just proved that we could no more form a successful society

than we could form the fruit upon the tree — it must be the natural

growth of the interest that each one feels in it from the benefits of

enjoyments derived from it. The greater these benefits. the stronger the

bond of society. Where there is no interest felt, there is no bond of

society, whatever its unions, its organizations, its constitutions,

governments or laws may be.

If the enjioyments derived from society are its true bond, what do we

want of any other? “We want governments and laws to regulate the

movements of the members of society, to prevent encroachments upon each

other, and to manage the common interests for common benefit. ”

But the movements of society have never been regulated. Encroachments

have never been prevented, but are increasing every day, and the common

interests have never been managed to the satisfaction of the parties

interested. It is precisely these problems that remain to be solved,

which was our purpose in our late movement. It had been defeated b y our

attempt to govern each other, to regulate each other’s movements for the

common benefit, no two having the same view of the common benefit and no

one retaining the same view from one week to another. Infinite diversity

instead of unity is inevitable, especially in a progressive or

transitory stage. Then why not leave each one to regulate his own

movements within equitable limits, provided we can find out what equity

is, and leave the rest to the universal instinct of self-preservation?

But what constitutes equity is the greatest question of all. It is the

unknown quantity that even algebra has failed to furnish. One thing is

certain. If all our wants are supplied, that is all we want. Could we

not supply each other’s without entangling ourselves in communism and

thereby involving ourselves in interminable conflicts and fruitless

legislation? Could we not have a central point in each neighborhood

where all wants might be made known, and where those wanting employment

or who have anything to dispose of could also apply, and thus bring

demand and supply together and adapt one to the other? Then, as to

exchange — on what principle could it be equitably conducted? Here the

idea of labor for labor presented itself: but hour for hour in all

pursuits did not seem to promise the equilibrium required: because those

those who perform the most disagreeable kinds of labor make the greatest

sacrifices for the general good, and should they not be compensated in

proportion to the sacrifices made? If not, then (opportunities being

equally open to all) starved, ragged, insulted labor would be shunned

even more than it is now, by ever one who can avoid it, and more

respected and more agreeable pursuits would be over crowded and conflict

between all will continue and the demand and supply be thrown out of

balance.: but, as no pledges or compacts would be entered into, every

one could make any exceptions to the hour for hour rule that suited him.

This would be one application of equitable freedom.

Estimating the price of every thing by the labor there is in it promised

to abolish all speculations on land, on clothing, food, fuel, knowledge,

on every thing — to convert time into capital, thereby abolishing the

distinctions of rich and poor — to reduce the amount of necessary labor

to two or three hours a day, when no one should wish to shun his share

of employment. The motive of some to force others to beaqr their burden

would not exist, and slavery of all kinds would naturally become

extinct. Every consumer becomes interested thereby in assisting in

reducing the costs of hbis own supplies, and in doing this for himself,

he is doing it for all consumers. Destructive competition would be

changed into an immediate regulator of prices and property, and property

might ultimately become so abundant that like water in a river or

spontaneous fruits all prices would be voluntarily abandoned, and the

high and noble aims of communists be reached without communism, without

organisation, without constitutions or pledges, without any legislation

in conflict with the natural and inalienable individualities of men and

things.

Overwhelmed with astonishment and bewildered with the newness and

immense magnitude of the subject, Werner began to doubt his own sanity,

and to think that perhaps the late disappointments had deranged his

thoughts. Day after day he retired into the woods outside of the town to

ponder and to detect if possible some lurking error in his reasoning;

but the closer he criticized, the more he was confirmed. He concluded to

return to Cincinnati and place himself in some working position where he

could bring these ideas to practical tests. If they failed under trial,

he would give up all specific reforms and keep a common family store.

For he would apply first apply these new idea in store keeping. If they

did not succeed, the transition would be easy, into a store of the

common kind; but if successful, then the store must be wound up to

commence new villages where the new ideas could be applied to the

affairs of social life.

Werner thought he would try the experiment of presenting these strange

ideas to one of his associates. What! he exclaimed with a sarcastic

smile, no organization? no constitution? no laws? no rulers? Where is

the bond of society and social order?

There has never been any bond to general society, said Werner: bonds

have existed more or less strong within narrow limits of sects, parties,

clans, tribes, classes, combinations and corporations in proportion to

the points of co-incidence between their members. But just in proportion

to the strength of such bonds the different parties unavoidably became

hostile to one another.

Society, even what there has been of it, has always been tumbling to

pieces and thinkers and tinkers have always been employed in patching up

some rent or leakage, but one has no sooner been stopped than two others

have been opened; and now, it is generally seen that patching is

hopeless. I [?] thought we had come here with this conviction and with a

view to remodel the whole structure.

The bond of society is the interest felt in the advantages (or

enjoyments) derived from or expected from it, or there is no bond. The

greatest advantages derived from civilization — all that distinguishes

it from primitive or savage life are derived fro labor: but they have

been enjoyed by those who perform the labor. The workers are the

foundation, soul and substance of civilization, but they can scarcely be

expected to feel much devotion to that which takes all from them and

gives them little or nothing in return; and if a way is ever opened by

which they can enjoy the benefits they are justly entitled to, no bond

can keep them in their present condition. And when the foundation moves,

the structure must move or fall.

The bond you speak of has been represented by a bundle of dry sticks and

they are accepted as a symbol of union. But dry sticks never can be

united; united sticks would be a log of wood. But the symbol is a good

one to represent what some would have society to be: lifeless beings

forced together by external bonds, retaining from age to age the same

form, substance, and inertness. But human beings are not dead, dry

sticks; they have a natural tendency to grow. A better symbol of what

would now be called “society” would be the limbs of a tree all bent

upwards, forced together at the top and bound round with iron hoops

crushing all of them out of their legitimate shapes, stopping all their

fruit-bearing power, chafing and bruising each other but still retaining

life enough to grow larger if not beautiful, now bursting the bonds or

else forcing their way into each other’s vitals and becoming one united

mass, a solid log, a barren, shapeless, hideous thing, an encumbrance to

the ground.

Do justice to labor, and then we may see something of “the bond of

society and social order”: not so much on paper as in every aspect of

social life.

Werner returned to Cincinnati and began to talk with his friends about

his intended enterprise, but they recoiled at once from any new

movements. They said that nobody would listen now to anything of the

kind while the failures at New Harmony were so fresh ion their minds.

But, said Werner, this is nothing like any of those experiments. Where

there is no organization, it ids only individuals that can fail. But,

said the objectors, where is your bond of society? and where the capital

to come from without organization? Werner replied that he was going to

act as any common store keeper now conducts his business, excepting that

he was going to set and regulate his prices by an equitable principle

instead of having no principle; and that the benefits the customers

would derive from this would constitute the bond.

After spending three weeks in this manner, going over the same ground,

bond and all, with different persons, Werner perceived that scarcely a

single one had got the least idea of what he intended: but that as old

words will not explain new things, new things must explain themselves.

Although he had no capital he would not consent to any joint stock

operation; knowing that he should have as many masters as there were

stockholders, that no two of them could agree for a month in such a new

undertaking and that mutual criticism and the friction of continuous

legislation would be sure to wear out all parties and defeat the

movement sooner or later.

He went to a wholesale grocer of his acquaintance and said to him “I

think I see the causes of our failures at New harmony and I want to

satisfy myself whether I am correct or not. If I am right, I shall sell

a few goods rapidly. If I am deceived I shall keep a common store and

let all reforms alone.

There is to be no company formed, no organization, not offices to

contend about. I shall act on my own responsibility and if I fail no one

will suffer. If I succeed the public will get a new lesson.

After a little explanatory conversation, the merchant said “I think I

see something of your design and it may work well ansd perhaps revive

the hopes of the reformers. You may come to my store and get whatever

you want and pay when the goods are sold, and if you want what I have

not got, I will pass my word where you can get them.”

Werner took about three hundred dollars worth of groceries and a few

staple dry goods and arranged them in his store; stuck up the bills of

purchase so that all customers could see what every article cost; and a

notice saying that seven per cent would be added to pay contingent

expenses. But instead of mixing up the profit of the keeper along with

the prices of the goods, the customers would pay the first costs and

seven per cent; but fror the labor of the keeper, they were to pay an

equal amount of their own labor. A clock was in plain sight to measure

the of the tenders in delivbering the goods, which was considered one

half of the labor and purchasing &c. the other half. An index resembling

the face of a clock was fixed just below it; and when the tender

commenced to deliver goods, he was to set the index to correspond with

the clock. The index would stand still while the clock would run on, and

a comparison of the two would show how much time had been employed. the

labor in some of the most common necessaries had been ascertained, and a

list of them hung up where all could see the labor price at which any of

these articles would be taken in and given out, the customer paying for

the labor of the tender and one twentieth of the price of the article

for contingent expenses. These prices were permanent. The keeper of the

store would give an holur of his labor in buying and selling goods for a

pound of butter because there was an hour’s labor in it; thirty hours

for a barrel of flour because there was about that amount of labor in

it. An hour of his merchandising for an hour of the drayman, the shoe

maker, the needle woman, the wash woman, &c.

All being ready for operation, Werner went to a friend to a friend and

invited him o come and try the experiment of buying some thing; and he

promised to come at a certain hour but he did not come. Werner then went

to another and he promised to come at a time fixed on, but he never

came! Werner then went to a third one who promised to come at a certain

hour, but he never made his appearance. In desperation Werner went to a

fourth, one who could not refuse, and begged him as a favor to come and

go through the process of buying something and if he did not wish to

keep his articles, he could return them and receive his money. This man

came and bought articles to the amount of a dollar and fifty cents and

gave Werner his note for fifteen minutes of his labor and saved fifty

cents.

He did not want to return the articles, but going home with them met

C.P. who had been to New Harmony with us, and he came immediately to the

store, exclaiming “My God! What fools we were at New Harmony. Why didn’t

we see such a simple and self-evident thing as this?. Here, give me ten

pounds of coffee, twenty of sugar” (&c.). He bought five dollars worth

of the most common necessaries and saved a dollar and a half, or the

wages of a day and a half of the hardest kind of labor. “Now,” he said,

“how shall I pay you for your twenty minutes?” Werner replied, “one

great point is to show how we can emancipate our supplies as well as

ourselves from the tyranny of common money. As I cannot make use of your

labor, and as there will be many other cases of the same kind, I have

set a labor price upon several articles such as tea, coffee, sugar, and

spices, at which I am willing to receive them and run the risk of

selling them again, not professing to have found out the exact amount of

labor in them, for this is not of so much importance as it is to fix a

price that shall remain the same when it is bought and when it is sold

and which is satisfactory to the parties concerned. So, you may give me

the price of a pound of coffee in money, I will weigh it out and put it

among the labor articles and give you an hour of my labor for it.

Deducting the twenty minutes already due me and the labor of weighing

out the coffee I shall owe you about thirty five minutes, for which I

will give you my note which you can use in future purchases. Or you can,

at any time, take out the amount of coffee which it represents. This was

entirely satisfactory and it was done.

C.P. went away and began to spread the news about the store. There was a

department in the store for medicines, and the next articles sold were

carbonate of soda and tartaric acid. They were bought by a lady who

worked with her needle for about twenty five or thirty cents a day. The

medicines, bought in the common way would have cost her sixty eight

cents; they now cost her seventeen cents and five minutes of her needle

work, giving her note for the work. She saved the wages of about two

days’ labor in this little transaction of about five minutes.

The business now began to grow, but during the whole of the first week,

only ten dollars worth of goods were sold, the next week thirty, and

very soon a crowd of customers thronged to the store and many were

obliged to go away unserved because they could not get where the goods

were delivered. All this was natural growth without any stimulus from

the news papers, for Werner could not hope to make the subject

understood through them when he failed with friends in familiar

conversation.

Werner now began to buy at auction. There he bought three barrels of

excellent rice for a cent and a quarter a pound while the common retail

price was eight cents a pound. The lady who bought the medicines bought

thirty pounds of this for forty five cents, and saved a dollar and

ninety five cents in five minutes, for which she gave Werner her note

for five minutes more of her needle work. In other words she had saved

the proceeds of about eight days of her labor in this equitable exchange

of five minutes. Werner got her to make some cloth bags for the store,

which employed her two hours. he now gave her back two notes of five

minutes each, and gave his notes for an hour and fifty minutes in

merchandising.

A store keeper came and wanted to buy the whole of the rice, but Werner

declined selling it. “What? You keep goods to sell and don’t want to

sell them? The more you sell, the more money you make, don’t you?”

No sir. In the first place I don’t take money for my labor, and if I did

I should not get any more for the same time spent in selling large

quantities than small ones. But these are not my reasons for refusing to

sell. I want to distribute it as a public educator and for the benefit

of those who will be likely to reciprocate the same principle. If you

had all along been selling goods on the labor for labor principle, I

would sell you a part on it. But if I deal at all with you, I should

deal as you deal.

“Do you mean to say that you should gain no more profit to yourself in

buying and selling a hundred barrels of flour than in buying and selling

five pounds, if it took no more time?”

Yes sir; certainly; which ever required the greatest sacrifice of my

time or comfort I should charge the most for.

“Well, that is a strange idea!”

No doubt, said Werner, but does it not appear reasonable to charge the

most for what costs us the most time and trouble?

I cannot but say yes to that, said the other, but it is so very strange,

so noew, I can hardly grasp the idea. Yes sir, said Werner, Justice is a

great stranger, but I will invite you to examine this labor for labor

idea and see what you think it will lead to.

Terms and Conditions of the Quarterly Letter

It should be understood that the undersigned is alone responsible for

the contents of the Letter unless some other responsibility is given.

Price. On the equitable principle, three minutes labor a page or two

hours per year. In the common way, one cent a page or fifty cents a

year.

All communication should be addressed toJosiah Warren, Cliftondale (near

Boston) Mass.

II. Narrative Practical Experiments, Contd.: Tuscarawas, Utopia and

Modern Times

Here are passages from the 1872 booklet Practical Applications of “True

Civilization” to the Minute Details of Every Day Life, Being Part III of

the “True Civilization” Series (text obtained from the Houghton Library,

Harvard). The description of Modern Times is both advertently and

inadvertently comical: the spectacle of an amazingly strait-laced

advocate of absolute freedom dealing with a bunch of eccentrics. The

backwoods projector is lobbed suddenly into the ambit of New York City,

and the 1830s reformer into the decadent phase of American reform.

Tuscarawas

The first village was attempted in Tuscarawas Co., Ohio, in 1835. Six

families were on the ground — 24 persons in all. 23 of them had the ague

or some other bileous complaint some portion of the first year! We

became alarmed and dared not invite any friends to join us. We thought

we would try one more year; but these complaints prevailed as before,

and in addition to them, the influenza carried off twelve, mostly young,

vigorous, healthy people within a circle of thirty families of the

neighborhood, within two weeks. We now resolved to get away from the

locality as soon as possible, and we did so, at the almost total

sacrifice of buildings, furniture, and land, but with the view of

concentrating again when our shattered finances had been recruited.

The time between 1837 and 1842 passed in repairing damages. In March

1842 another store (just like that in Cincinnati in 1827) was set in

operation in New Harmony, the old seat of Mr. Owen’s communistic

experiments. This store worked with an immense power in revolutionizing

the retail trade in that region. It consumed about three years. But

these cheapening stores, however successful, and however

revolutionizing, are chiefly valuable only as means of getting public

attention to the principles upon which the great revolution required

must be based. It is of only momentary consequence to cheapen the prices

of supplies to those who live upon wages. If they could live on a cent a

day, a cent or day would be their wages, while destructive competition

rages between them. Nothing short of homes of their own and new elements

to work with can bring the required relief.

Utopia, Ohio

In 1844 I was in Cincinnati when an association according to Fourier was

being formed. I gave a discourse to a small audience, consisting mostly

of those interested in that movement. My chief points were that joint

stock necessarily involves joint management, and that joint management

in such new and complicated movements is impossible, that we cannot

construct any verbal organization that will not wear itself out by its

own friction. And I said, “I know that a large portion of my hearers are

engaged in an enterprise with the best possible motives and the highest

hopes, but you cannot succeed; you will fail within three years. But

when you come to fail, I beg you, for your own sakes, to remember what I

have said tonight, and that there is a road to success.”

In about two years and eight months I learned that they had broken up in

the worst humor with each other, and in fact some had had a hand to hand

scramble for some of the joint property.

In June 1847 I went up to their locality, thinking that they might be

disposed to try “equity.” I had not been landed from the steam boat

thirty minutes when Mr. Daniel Prescott (a stranger to me) approached

and said, “Well, we failed, just as you said we should — it worked just

as you said it would. Now I am ready for your movement.”

There were six families almost destitute, even of shelter. There was but

little talking to do, no organization to get up, no constitution nor

bylaws to make. The first step was to get land, but no one had the money

to buy it. A proposition was made to the owner of a few acres, to lay

them out into quarter acre lots and set a price upon each that would

give him all he asked now for the land by the acre, adding all the costs

of streets, alleys, surveying, and to pay for his own time and trouble

in attending to it, and to bind himself and his heirs to keep that

price, unaltered, for three years.

He consented, and the village was laid out at once and work commenced:

though I doubt whether ten dollars in money could have been in the

possession of the six families at that time. It was now about the middle

of July 1847. On the first of December following, four of the six

families had good houses and lots of their own, nearly or wholly paid

for.

On moving into their new house in December (a brick house about thirty

feet square and two stories high), Mrs. Prescott stood in her kitchen

and casting a look of surprise round the room, exclaimed, “Well! they

say this is our house, but how in the world we came by it I cannot

imagine!”

Mr. Prescott was a carpenter and exchanged more or less work with

others. No common money passed between them.

Another of these pioneers, Mr. Cubberley, shall tell his own story. He

wrote it out to be printed in 1848. Here it is:

“Mr. Editor, Here is a statement of the simple facts that may be of some

value to the readers of your paper.

“Last July, when Mr. Jernegan had this town laid out, I thought I would

buy a lot and get it fenced in last fall, and be gathering materials

through the winter, for building on it in the spring. But the house that

I then occupied was too bad to winter in, and as I could not get any

other near, I came to the conclusion that I must build one. Well, I

began to look round to see where the means should come from. I found I

had about thirty dollars in money, and about nine or ten dollars worth

of shoe materials (rather a small sum to think about building a house

with!), but on enquiry of those who had the brick, lumber &c., I found

that I could exchange my labor for theirs: that is, to give my labor for

theirs in bricks, lumber, hauling &c. Well, I set to work with what

means I had. The result is, I have got a brick house, one story and a

half high, sixteen by eighteen feet, and a small wooden addition that

serves as a kitchen. And all the money I paid out was eleven dollars and

eighty five cents.

“All this is the result of equitable commerce.

“A word to the Fourierists, who contemplate such great advantages in a

phalanx, combination, united interests &c.

“I was in the Clermont Phalanx for nearly three years, and paid two

hundred and seven dollars, and worked harder all the time, with not the

best of eatables either. And at the end of that time I found myself

rather badly situated: no money, no good clothes, no tools to commence

work with, no anything.

“I borrowed twenty six dollars to commence my business with, and last

July I paid all that, and had thirty dollars left. I now have a house

and lot, and all I owe on it is two dollars and seventy nine cents in

money, and about four days labor.

“I feel now that I am a whole individual — not a piece of a mass, or of

somebody else, as I was in combination.”

Mr. Cubberley is still living in that house and can be consulted if

necessary: but it has been thought important from the beginning not to

make the place notorious, as it would cause great inconvenience to the

residents, there being no public house for the entertainment of

visitors, and for other reasons that will appear as we proceed.

The way these lots were sold and the prices fixed, we believe to be a

most peaceful, most satisfactory and efficient mode of stopping

speculation on land. It makes no quarrel with present ownership. It

satisfies the owners, not only giving them a price for their land which

satisfies them, but tends to immediately surround them with the best of

neighbors and growing better all the time, bringing the city

conveniences to them upon equitable terms, and opens the way at once for

the homeless to get homes of their own without legislation or any other

vexation: all resulting from the simple application of the cost

principle to land tenures as they now are, and I cannot see any other

reliable solution to this great question.

In about two years after the commencement of this village, I was going

down to Cincinnati, and anticipating enquiries as to our progress, and

unwilling to give my own version of things, I went to the residents

themselves to get their own words to report to our friends. I took my

book and pencil and went to the first I met. “Well, Mr. Poor, what shall

I say to our friends in Cincinnati about our progress?”

Mr. Poor. “Why, I hardly know. I am surprised that people are so slow to

see and take hold. I expected that a great many would have come before

this time. If they want homes, small homes, this is the place to get

them. Tell them that when I landed here two years ago, I sent my last

dollar to Cincinnati for a barrel of flour and hadn’t enough left in my

pocket to jingle, and now I have a comfortable house, with room enough,

two acres of land, a yoke of oxen and a cow and a garden, and would not

sell out for six hundred dollars.”

Mrs. Poor. “Tell them if they want homes to come here and get them —

that is the way we did and came five hundred miles for it: and I would

not now part with my home long enough to go on a visit to the East if

they would pay my passage both ways.”

Mr. H.B. Lyon. “Tell them the principles have benefited me and my

affairs, and although I have been acting on them about two years, I see

new beauties and have stronger confidence in them every day.”

Mrs. V. “Well, I must say that I am discouraged. I cannot get any one to

act with me on the principles. They will not give me employment and I

give up.”

Mr. Daniel Prescott. “I say now, what I have always said, that it works

well, as far as we have anything to work it with, and the farther we

work it, the better it works.”

Mr. Geo. Prescott. “Why, it works well. We get on as well as we could

expect with our means, and expect to do better as our means increase.”

Mr. Wm. Long. “We want more numbers. Our advantages will increase with

our numbers. I think people should understand that they will require

means enough to set themselves going. There is plenty to do, but each

must bring means to commence with, and then, all will go on finely.”

Mrs. C. “ I have not seen the workings of the principles long enough to

express an opinion, but Mr. C and myself have both been agreeably

disappointed by the unexpected kindness and attention of the people

here.”

Mr. Francis. “I could talk half a day on the advantages of the

principles. But I think talking almost useless. Action is what we want.”

Little Amelia. “You may tell them it is just the place to come to learn

music.”

Mr. Cubberley. “You may tell them that I have all my life been wanting

something, but didn’t know what it was. Now I have found it.”

Mrs. ___. “The principles embrace all that people will ever want, all

they can ever enjoy. But I will not let you say this from me, because it

might set down as effect of overwrought enthusiasm.”

Mrs. Prescott. “You may say that I have always embrace all that is

wanted. They are practicable too, just in proportion to numbers and

means: with plenty of people and even a small amount of means in the

hands of each, all would be worked handsomely out.” (Observe, “in the

hands of each,” not in the hands of a committee of managers, or

president and council.)

These persons mentioned were all adults who were on the ground at that

time. The singular coincidence between them cannot be attributed to any

pre-arranged understanding, for not one of them knew before hand that

their opinion would be asked for.

Mr. W. “The reason why the village does not grow any faster is that the

public know nothing of the subject. They judge it by what they know of

common reforms which have so repeatedly failed. They have no idea that

they have a whole new lesson to learn.”

Mrs Poor. “Why, do you think we grow slowly? Isn’t there twenty six

buildings put up here, out of nothing, as you may say? When we landed

here not two years ago, we had but five dollars in the world, and now my

husband says he would not sell out for six hundred dollars for his gains

over and above the support of the family; and all this the result of our

own labor. We have not gained it off other people — they have had all

that belongs to them. And besides, the boys have got trades without the

loss of a day in apprenticeships, instead of enslaving themselves seven

years of the best part of their lives for nothing. There is a door our

boy made; he has made sashes too. I speak of our own case. I have a

right to do that, but others have done as well as we have. Look at H.

That boy is, even now, a smooth workman, and his first attempt was upon

our own house.”

In less than three years there was a good saw and grist mill running,

owned (not by a company) but by an individual who had not a dollar when

the village commenced, but who was favored by a gentleman who

sympathized in the movement, and who had a steam engine and boiler to

dispose of. And he had the assistance and cooperation of all the

residents, because they were to have the lumber at the cost price; the

more assistance they could render, the less the price would be. But if

the price of the lumber was to have been set by common practice (the

owner of the mill demanding all he could have extorted from the

necessities of the settlers) then no such motive to cooperation would

have existed. As it was, the cooperation was as perfect as cooperation

could be, yet everyone was entirely free from all trammels of

organizations, constitutions, pledges, and every thing of the kind.

The owner of the mill issued his labor notes, payable in lumber.

H.B. Lyon paid for his lot with his labor notes. The mill needed his

labor and the owner of the land needed lumber. Mr. Lyon needed his labor

and the owner of the land needed lumber, and Mr. Lyon redeemed them in

tending the mill. With all my hopes, I had not dared to expect to see

land bought with labor notes, so soon as this.

While the types are being set for these pages (October 1872) there comes

an article written by Mr. Cubberley for publication. Alluding to the

labor notes, he says, “These put us here into a reciprocating society.

The result was, in two years, twelve families found themselves with

homes, who never owned them before. Labor capital did it. I built a

brick cottage one and a half stories high, and all the money I paid out

was $9.81. All the rest was effected by exchanging labor for labor.

Money prices, with no principle to guide, have always deceived us.”

When it is stated that this village was started twenty five years ago,

very natural questions are often asked: How large is it now? Why have

the public not heard more about it? Why are not a hundred such in full

operation? &c. No short, complete answer can be given to these very

reasonable questions. This particular village consisted of only about

eighty quarter acre lots (if I remember rightly). All the surrounding

lands were controlled by speculators who demanded such high prices that

after about four years the largest portion of the first settlers moved

all together to Minnesota, where land was abundant and cheap.

The contract with the land owner to keep the prices of the lots

unchanged for three years had expired before all the lots were taken up,

and it is labor and trouble thrown away to bestow them when the prices

of lots can be raised just in proportion as they become desirable.

“Well,” asks Mr. Jones, “did those who went to Minnesota still act on

the principles where they went?”

The only report I have heard from them is an incident between Mr. Poor

and a speculator who applied to him for his crop of potatoes. Mr. Poor

declined to sell them. “Why not?” asked the speculator. I will give you

thirty cents a bushel, while the highest price you can get from any one

else is thirty cents.”

Mr. Poor. “No I will sell them for speculation at any price. Twenty five

cents a bushel will pay me for my labor and I shall supply my neighbors

with them at that price.”

As has been before stated the public have learned but very little of the

subject, because the common, mercenary news papers could not do it any

justice, and it has been kept out of them as much as possible.

The next resort was publishing in book form. But people will not buy

books on a subject that they feel no interest in, and they cannot feel

an interest in that which they know nothing about. The little progress

that has been made has mostly been effected by giving away the works

published to here and there one who could be induced to look at them. It

is easy to see that no ordinary private resources could make very rapid

or extensive progress in that way. There are other reasons for slow

growth that will appear as we proceed.

Modern Times, New York

The third village was commenced on Long Island, NY in March, 1851, on

the Long Island R.R. 40 miles from New York.

One man went on the ground alone and built a little shanty, ten or

twelve feet square. There was not, at that time, even a cow path in

sight, among the scrub oaks that were every where breast high. In a few

days two others joined him: they built the first house with funds

supplied by a sympathizing friend.

The soil was so poor that it was generally considered worthless. Many

attempts of capitalists to turn it to account had failed. But a few

persons were very anxious to try the new principles and thought that the

soil might answer for gardens, while mechanism might furnish the

principal employments.

There was nothing on the land to make lumber of, and even the winter

fuel (coal) had to brought from the city. Even with these drawbacks,

houses seemed to go up, as they did in the other village, without means,

and those who never had homes of their own before suddenly had them.

We were going on very pleasantly without notoriety, but one of the most

active pioneers published an article in the Tribune relative to the

movement at Modern Times (as the village had been named). The effect

was, a rush of people, ignorant of the principles upon which the

enterprise was projected. Among these were some that were full of

crotchets, each one seeming to think that the salvation of the world

depended on his displaying his particular hobby. One regular impostor

traveled over the Island announcing himself as the founder of the

village, and he put forth such crude theories, especially with regard to

marriage, that his audiences were disgusted, not only with him, but with

what they supposed the village to be, and some very good neighbors who

had kindly welcomed us to the neighborhood, shut their doors in the face

one who was offering them hand bills to counteract the blasting

influence of this lying impostor.

Another favorite crotchet of his was, that children ought to be brought

up without clothing! And he inflicted some crazy experiments on his

children in the coldest weather. A woman, too, got this notion, and kept

her infant naked in the midst of winter. With all his genius and noble

efforts, Lord Bacon has not entirely secured us against the delusions of

mere fancies, instead of building our theories on experience.

A German, who was wholly or partly blind, paraded himself naked in the

streets, with the theory that it would help his sight. He was stopped by

an appeal to the overseer of the insane asylum.

He could see well enough to take a neighbor’s coat from a fence where

the owner of it had been at work. This gave the neighbors an idea that

we were a nest of thieves as well as fanatics. To counteract this, hand

bills were printed and circulated describing the person, and advising

the neighbors who might miss any thing to come to that village and look

for it in his premises. This placed the responsibility upon him,

individually, where it belonged, and put an end to his pilfering.

One woman took a notion to parade the streets in men’s clothing, having

a bad form, the clothes a bad fit and of the worst possible color and

texture, she cut such a hideous figure that women shut down their

windows and men averted their heads as she passed. Yet it was very easy

for the sensation news paper reporters to say that “the women of Modern

Times wore mens’ clothing and looked hideously enough!”

I can believe the woman dressed in this manner, for the purpose of

breaking in upon the tyranny of fashions, and to vindicate the right to

dress as she pleased. But there was no need of any vindication where her

absolute sovereignty in all things (within her own sphere) was already

admitted. It seemed not to have occurred to her that this same right of

sovereignty in other people, should secure them against being

unnecessarily disgusted and offended. But it is nothing new, especially

with reformers, to “lose our manners in learning our philosophy.”

It seemed not to have occurred to the woman in mens’ clothes, that the

influence of woman is one of the greatest civilizing powers we have, and

we need to know when we are in their presence.

It had gone abroad that “the women of Modern Times wear mens’ clothes,”

and those who were disgusted at the imputation had no means of defending

themselves against it. This communistic reputation is the most

formidable obstacle to peace and progress that the world has to

overcome. All the inhabitants of a village, or a nation, all the members

of a party, a sect, or a family, are involved by it in the acts of every

or any member, sane or insane, on the horrid principle of the old

Japanese law that condemned a whole family to death when any member of

it had offended. There is no escape from this monstrosity, till the

public generally can be taught something about the great, preservative

fact that we are individuals, and that no one should be made responsible

for the act or word of another, without his or her known consent.

There must freedom to differ before there can be peace or progress, and

this freedom can come only by placing responsibility where it belongs.

The world needs new experiences, and it is suicidal to set ourselves

against experiments, however absurd they may appear, and we can afford

to tolerate them if we are not too closely mixed up with them. Some

people can learn nothing from the experience of others; they must have

measles, the whooping cough, and small pox for themselves, before they

can be secured against them. All we can demand of them is that they do

not endanger the health of others.

A young woman of the village had the diet mania to such a degree that

she was said to live almost wholly on beans without salt. She tottered

about a living skeleton for about a year and then sank down and died (if

we can say there was enough of her left to die). Though her brother also

had the diet theory dangerously, he had the candor to acknowledge, at

her funeral, that he believed the poor girl died in consequence of

theoretical speculations about diet.

The next report was “those people there, are killing themselves with

fanatical theories about their food.”

Another trial. A man came there with three young women to live with as

wives in the same house, and they started a paper to vindicate

themselves, full of sickly, silly, maudlin sentimentality that perfectly

disgusted the surrounding neighborhood so that even the name of the

place was something like an emetic. But, the settlers, faithful to the

great sacred right of freedom to do silly things, and knowing that

opportunity to get experience would work the best cure, they were

suffered to go on entirely undisturbed, though the effects of their

conduct were disturbing every other settler in the village.

They seemed to be totally ignorant of the fact that no four people, nor

even any two people can govern one house or drive one horse at the same

time, that nature demands and will have an individual deciding in every

sphere, whether that government is a person, an idea or anything else.

It must be an individual or all will be confusion. Three months trial

taught them this inevitable lesson, but the effects were much more

enduring.

These are a few of the trials to which such enterprises are always

exposed, and that keep people of culture and sensibility from taking any

part in them unless they are impelled by motives that are irresistible.

It is impossible and perhaps unnecessary to give an account of all the

obstacles that beset the village. But I will give one more. There was a

man (as I suppose we must call him) came there, planted himself in our

midst, publicly slandered and abused the most active friends of the

movement, apparently with a view to discourage them. He deliberately

wrote the most unqualified falsehoods and sent them to England, where

the subject was beginning to get respectful attention from men of

influence. He actually made a particular point of saying and doing those

very things that he afterwards caused to be published as a disgrace to

the place, and which had the effect to disgust friends abroad and turn

their eyes away from us, just as the enemies of liberty did in the

French Revolution: they mixed in with the crowd and urged on and

committed such monstrous crimes, that the world recoiled in disgust and

horror at the idea of revolutions and even of liberty itself.

Another case. A man, a preacher of some influence, came there to

investigate and returned to Cincinnati and delivered a public discourse

from the pulpit, which was afterwards published in the Cincinnati

Gazette under the heading of “Bohemianism.” Of twenty-six statements

made, twenty-five were wholly or partly false and one was equivocal. The

citizens felt outraged. A letter was sent to him and he promised to

rectify his stupid statements, but he never did.

With such infernal elements as those to contend with, is it not a wonder

that there is any village left at all? Yet, there is a very pretty one,

and it is improving faster than any other in the neighborhood. Where

many capitalists have lost all their investments in attempting to turn

the soil to account, a few industrious individuals with nothing but

their hands and their good sense have made themselves homes and

business. Where there was not even a cow path at the beginning, there is

now an avenue straight as a line, a hundred feet wide and nearly a mile

long, and other avenues and streets crossing each other at right angles.

The is a railroad station and a post office there, and an excellent road

six miles long, running out into the country in one direction and

extending to the South Bay in the other, and running right through the

town. The name of the place is changed [to Brentwood] and the annoyance

from that source is at an end.

One of the most common remarks of the citizens was that the village was

the greatest school they ever knew.

But it is not only what they have got but what they have not got that

constitute the gains of the residents. They have no quarrels about what

is called “religion.” No demands for jails. No grog shops. No houses of

prostitution. No fighting about politics. No man there has dashed his

wife’s brains out with an axe, nor cut her throat, nor murdered her in

any other way. No wife there has poisoned her husband. No starving child

has been torn from his home there and sent to prison for “unlawfully”

taking “ a penny’s worth of potatoes.” No poor, suffering girl or woman

has been persecuted to death there for that misfortune which is, of

itself, to grievous to be borne. No man or woman has murdered another

for rivalry, jealousy, or any other cause.

The gardens and strawberry beds are mostly without fences, yet no one

belonging to the village is seen in them without the owner’s consent.

Few if any doors are locked at night, and the fear of robbers and fire

disturbs no one’s sleep.

“We have heard,” says an enquirer, that the movement was a failure, and

that the principles were abandoned by the inhabitants.” (Second

speaker:) “Yes, I have heard the same: I heard one of the most devoted

friends of the movement propose to make a public announcement to that

effect, to protect themselves against the annoyances of too much public

notoriety.” He was not afraid that the laws of nature would fail,

whatever might be said of them.

Individuality is the great prevailing fact of all persons and things.

This never fails. Any denial of this only illustrates it.

Self-sovereignty is a form of expressing our natural promptings to have

our own way. This, also, is illustrated by all that is said, for or

against it: it is a universal propensity, a natural, primitive, divine

law. The cost principle is intended to express the fact that it is the

sacrifices or trouble incurred in the performance of a piece of service

that should measure its price. This is derived from our instinctive

aversion to that which is painful: another natural law. Adapting

supplies to our demands or wants is what we all aim at in every move we

make, whether we succeed or not. No one ever abandons the desire to have

what he wants. Equitable money is the only human contrivance in the five

elementary principles of the movement. The four others are not the work

of man, but natural phenomena: everywhere and at all times around and

within us, whether recognised or not. Like the process of breathing,

like the digestion of food or like the circulation of blood, they are

constantly acting whether we will or no, either with or against our

surroundings, and to talk of “abandoning” them, is like the attempt to

run away from one’s legs: it is an effort to do as they want to, and it

brings their right of self-sovereignty into more active operation.

No body talks of the principles of arithmetic having failed. If the

results disappoint the operator, he attributes it to some mistake of his

own, because he knows that arithmetical laws never fail. The blunder of

our critic is in not knowing that our enterprise is not based in human

inventions, but on natural laws that are as old as creation.

Q: Do the people in these villages use the equitable money now?

A: In the first stages, when they were building their houses, they used

it extensively because they needed each others’ labor, but they cannot

use it any farther than they can supply each others’ wants. Twenty

families cannot do much in this way, till they commence domestic

manufactures. But being obliged to draw most of their supplies of food,

clothing, and fuel from abroad they must use the common money. And here

is a reply to a very common remark, that “if every body was free to

issue notes for their labor, there would be an inundation of them.”

Exactly the opposite is the fact. We found that people generally

preferred to use the notes of others rather than to issue their own, and

instead of there being a flood of notes afloat, they disappear in

proportion as the necessity for them ceases.

Q: You have intimated that the odious doctrine of “free love” was

fastened upon the village in order to set the public against the

movement. Your assertion of the right of self-sovereignty certainly

gives free scope to free love, or any ism or crotchet, however

ridiculous or dangerous.

A: Yes, certainly it gives perfect freedom for anyone to do any thing

that he can do at his own cost.

Every one is now free to wear a crown of thorns upon his head all the

time, but no one does it. Whoever tries what is vulgarly called “free

love” (if I understand what the words mean), will find it more

troublesome than a crown of thorns. And there is not much danger of its

becoming contagious where the results of experiments are made known. But

forbid it and keep people ignorant of the effects of it, and there is

danger of trouble of inexpressible. Among about thirty persons in and

near New York who tried the experiment, two men shot themselves, one

hung himself, one died in the insane asylum, and another told me that he

would sooner commit suicide than to live as he had (in that way) the

last nine years, and although decidedly against the common marriage

system, he went back under it, as the least of present evils.

In what I have said, I have not mentioned the worst effects of

promiscuity. These are best made known by a visit to Dr. Jourdain’s

gallery of anatomical specimens at number 397 Washington St., Boston.

For thirty three years spent in the midst of controversies and

experiments on the subject, I remained in doubt as to what form that

relationship would assume in the reign of equitable freedom. But about

thirteen years ago, with the help of an English publication I did come

to conclusions that have, ever since, remained undisturbed. One of these

conclusions was, that this great subject is involved in the labor

question, that justice to all labor of men, women, and children will

settle it, as probably nothing else can, and without justice to labor,

there is no escape from a return to barbarism.

In studying individuality as the great principle of order, and of

security of confusion, you will see that it sanctions the most essential

features of the common marriage systems, which are, one man to one woman

for definite, specified length of time, renewable by consent of both

parties.

Q: Have you come to any conclusions as to the expediency of forming

these villages?

A: Yes, I think it will be necessary to form them at any costs. If our

efforts do not secure homes to the homeless, we work to no purpose, and

these homes cannot be secured in the cities now built. But the hardships

that pioneers encounter can be borne only by those of the hardiest

constitutions. These hardships are incident to new lands and new

principles, and to those who cannot bear them, I would recommend

introducing the new elements into villages already partly formed,

wherever land can be had on the proposed terms, and not far from where

the movers had been accustomed to live, making no public proclamations,

but letting the practical operations commend the principles to

surrounding minds by natural degrees, so that fruits shall come by

growth, not by any attempt at formation.

Q: You speak of getting land on the proposed terms. I don’t know as I

quite understand your idea.

A: It is, to get the holders of land to bind themselves by legal

contract to sell certain specified lots at certain specified prices for

a certain term of years.

In laying out the first village, the term was three years, but this was

not long enough. In our second (Modern Times) we had five years, but

considering the obstacles, this was not long enough. At the expiration

of this term, speculation grasps at the unsold lots, and then it is no

longer worth while to do anything for further growth. While the

principles are so little known, I would suggest ten years in which to

fill up a settlement of, say, a thousand acres.

Points Suggested for Consideration in Laying Out Towns

him or her (when labor is properly paid) to positively cut off the power

to monopolize the soil.

of their own immediate surroundings and companionship or neighbors.

locality, in regard to public resorts and places of business.

practicable while preserving sufficient room to avoid mutual

disturbance.

growth will be only a repetition of what has already been done, and

given satisfaction, and which can be continuously extended outwards, so

that enlarging will not compel emigrations to remote regions, deprived

of all the conveniences that habit has rendered necessary — perhaps to

die of new peculiarities of climate, or hard work without help.

thinker has some favorite ideas to try, but only one can be tried at one

time by any body of people, and there is but little chance of getting

the consent of all to any thing new or untried. If a new project can

find half a dozen advocates, it is unusually fortunate. If a hundred

experiments were going on at once, there might be fifty times the

progress that there would be with only one. To attain this very

desirable end, it should be practical for the few advocates of any new

project to try it without involving any others in risks, expenses, or

responsibilities or disturbances of any kind. And yet all might benefit

by the results of such experiments, either positively, or negatively as

warnings.