Kate Crane Gartz
Page 6
He is for the exploited masses, his sympathies are real and deep. He went to jail for standing for those opinions and convictions, for violating a law which everybody knows was unconstitutional. “Congress shall make no law abridging free speech!” It is absolutely disgusting for people like you to presume to call a man like him a physical and moral coward. Is there any other man in this country who has been compared to Christ? To him the laws of God were paramount, not the laws of man, which would conscript our children to slaughter other children in the cause of commercial and governmental rivalries.
Yes, those three thousand men were his friends, and he was theirs; but not for the reason you impute, but for the same reason that Christ was the friend of all humanity. Because they were born human beings, and were victims of our unjust social system, we do not help to make men of them, but we do all we can to make beasts of them, by neglect and vicious treatment. Yes, Debs’ is the Gospel of Love, while yours is the Hymn of Hate. If you could turn those hideous words you utter against him, back op yourself, they would indeed be expressing more truth.
Yours very truly,
KATE CRANE GARTZ.
December 29, 1921.
EDITOR,
The Los Angeles Times,
LOS ANGELES, CAL.
Dear Sir: If you are so opposed to Socialism, Bolshevism, Sovietism, for goodness sake suggest something. Are you satisfied when you know there are six million unemployed—practically twenty-five million starving in a land of plenty? Why put all the blame on Bolshevism, which at least is trying to find a solution? What is the matter with our own precious Capitalism? What do you think unemployment leads to? Need I tell you—REVOLUTION. This country ignores the problem, while all other countries are at least thinking about it. What are you, the mouthpiece of the people, doing? I don’t want revolution, but you evidently don’t mind. You say brains are necessary for leadership; Lenin is famous for that commodity, has been called the greatest statesman in the world, a highly intellectual man, a member of the bourgeoisie (with a heart), not a proletarian “upstart,” as you like to believe.
You seem to believe in a God, can you not intercede then on behalf of our people as well as Russia? You say the Russians misunderstand any effort on our part to help. Did the blockade help? Or forcing them to fight on thousands of miles of front? No wonder they are suspicious of our efforts to help!
Yours very truly,
KATE CRANE GARTZ.
December 30, 1921.
EDITOR,
Pasadena Evening Post,
PASADENA, CAL.
Dear Sir: Your editorial last evening on “The Reds Lose” reminds me again of the colossal ignorance of those who will not see, and refuse to learn the truth about things and people—“ists,” as you call them.
Volumes have been written about the case of Sacco and Vanzetti, and you will see by the enclosed article that they do not belong to the reprobate class as you like to believe, but are defended by the best minds in this country.
The handling of this case was a travesty of justice, as were many other cases during the war madness, and under the unconstitutional espionage law; so it is no wonder that protests are pouring in from all over the world, as they did in the Mooney case, which we now know was a “frame up.”
If you had any interest in the cause of labor you would look into these questions before you attacked them. In any case read the enclosed letter by Vanzetti, and see if there is anyone in your office to compare with him in intelligencer idealism.
Yours very truly,
KATE CRANE GARTZ.
January 5, 1922.
EDITOR,
The Los Angeles Times,
I have read in your issue of January 4 your editorial, entitled “Reds in Colleges.” It seems to me somewhat unintelligent on your part to be so sure that there can be no possible connection between intelligence and Socialism, while at the same time you complain because so many college professors and intellectuals all over the world are studying and teaching Socialism. Does it not occur to you that there must be some reason for this development among our college teachers, and that maybe after all Socialism is the coming ideal of a new and more just society? Do you love Capitalism so very much, and do you love your own bread and butter so much that you cannot forgive others for wanting it also? They do want it, and they can’t have it under Capitalism, and they could have it under Socialism. It seems natural that men should be made happy by seeing others happy, but one finds you always tearing your hair at the thought of justice to all humanity, and so gloating over injustice that you have earned the hatred of all classes.
You say Socialism is the creed of the illiterate. Are our college professors illiterate? Do you see nothing paradoxical in that statement? Do you see nothing paradoxical in the fact that Debs should be in jail for saying exactly the same thing as President Wilson said—the only difference being that Debs was smart enough to say it first? Read in the book, “Debs and the Poets,” what the greatest writers and thinkers of the world have said and thought about this man.
Yes, the college professors are thinking. The Committee of Forty-eight knows of two thousand who are actually thinking—and you cannot stop them! They are thinking about a new world where poverty will be abolished and every human being will have a right to the good things of life—as much a right as you have or as I have. Just now I am living in luxury because fifteen thousand other human beings are working for me. And not so far away from me lives a mother of seven children, whose husband—not a union man of the sort you despise—has been thrown out of work. He has been walking the streets for days, begging you and your capitalist friends for work. He has the God-given right to work, but you have the power to deny him that right, and you use the power and bid him and his children to starve. I have many such people on my list, and that is why I am a Socialist, and know that Socialism, the science of social reconstruction, must be taught in our colleges. It is only feared by selfish men who do not want their privileges interfered with. I tell you that your outworn and unjust social system is sick of a mortal disease, and your outcries against the spread of Socialism are perfectly futile.
Sincerely,
KATE CRANE GARTZ.
January 11, 1922.
MR. WOODWORTH CLUM,
Better America Federation,
LOS ANGELES, CAL.
Dear Sir: Since you have sent me your pamphlet, “Making Socialists of College Students,” I shall proceed to educate you, as you and all your “Better America Federation” belong to the dark ages. In the first place, if you really wanted to better America, I should be with you, because that is just what I want. But you simply want to keep things as they are, while I want to see great changes for a really better world, where poverty will be eliminated and where all men can be sure of justice being meted out to them; where men will not have to beg for jobs, and when they get them, the fruits of their labor will not be appropriated by the few, as now in the kind of world that satisfies you.
No, these college professors you condemn are the idealists of the world, who want to see the teachings of Christ come true. You give yourself away in your very first page, when you say, “You business men, you men of property, how does this impress you?” “Property,” that’s it, but what about “humanity”? That is just the difference between you and those splendid college professors who think, and for that reason are not wanted in colleges supported by capitalists who are satisfied with the existing system. But how can they be, is the amazing thing, when they know, if they know anything, that everything they enjoy has been handed to them by the labor of these very masses, who live on the ragged edge, in order that the few may live on the fat of the land.
I am glad you are following the development of radical thought, as you say you are. I am only surprised that you have not learned more of their “ultimate” aims and objects. If you are capable of learning—and a college man should be—you would not be so afraid of them, for they all belong to the class who really want a b
etter world. They would not hurt you or any man—only the capitalist system. They want to get rid of all hurts. You are afraid of the word Revolution. It does not necessarily mean a bloody one, like our late war, which you so ardently stood for, but a revolution of thought, ideals; also, perhaps our government is not as perfect as it should be. And perhaps the capitalist system is not the “ultimate,” as you seem to think. It might be changed a little, so as to include all of us instead of just a few. In fact, I think the time is coming when we will be able to get along without it altogether, and set up a cooperative commonwealth and an internationalism which will do away with rivalries and wars, and when all humanity will be one, and free to live as human beings should live, just because we are all God’s creatures.
Now that is all we Socialists, Anarchists, Radicals, Bolshevists, 48ers, Communists, want. So don’t be afraid of us, come and join us, and let us work for a really better America.
Sincerely,
KATE CRANE GARTZ.
January 30, 1922.
MR. Woodworth CLUM,
Better America Federation,
LOS ANGELES, CAL.
Sir: It is almost useless to try to influence interest, or explain to a closed mind; one which persists in misunderstanding and misinterpreting motives of radicals. Yet I will try again. A radical is one who wants to get at the root of a trouble and remove the cause. That is all. Why do you wish to fight that? Every man should be willing to endorse that object. So what is the matter with you and Mr. Haldeman and your handful of Better Americans? I will tell you. You don’t want to remove the cause of unrest and injustice. You want only bigger business, and that always at the expense of the man who produces wealth for you.
As for Max Eastman, he needs no defense. Thinking people everywhere appreciate him and the use he is making of his unusual ability. The fact that he drew a crowd of fifteen thousand in San Francisco, and was hailed and cheered as a triumphant chief, is to be compared with the fact that only fifty people came to your meeting.
If William Bross Lloyd gave two hundred thousand dollars for the cause of radicalism, that fact alone should make you wish to know why. That a millionaire should spend his money upon a cause, rather than upon pearl necklaces and steam yachts—that appears to be a crime in your eyes, but not to him. He wants to see the bread and butter question settled, even if it takes a revolution, which Thomas Jefferson said was necessary now and then, because the propertied classes block evolution.
I did not bail out the Industrial Workers of the World in January, as you say; not because I would not, but because I was not asked to. There are a few others besides myself willing to come to the aid of men who are being railroaded to the penitentiary, simply because they belong to an organization, never having committed an overt act.
Mr. Haldeman was an employee of my father’s. He should refrain from bandying my name about. But he cannot hurt me—he only makes me prouder and happier than ever to be associated with the names mentioned, as well as with Anatole France, Romain Rolland, H. G. Wells, and Bernard Shaw—all consecrated to the making of a Better World and not merely Better Business.
Why quote the “Liberator’s” appeal for funds as a dastardly thing? There are not enough K. C. G.’s and W. B. Lloyds to support radical magazines, against the millions of the capitalist press. The moneyed interests had the power to suppress the radical papers, and they did so; why? Because the radicals told the truth about the war, about capitalism, about government. The moneyed interests evidently had something to conceal, because they feared the truth. But truth will always come out, in the end. It can’t be shut up in a box or a penitentiary, and the people are getting tired of suppressions and prohibitions, Thus you find plenty of unrest to deal with!
Now comes the Non-partisan League to California. How can any thinking person object to that? But then, you don’t think—at least not any further than your own self-interest Employment for the unemployed! How dreadful! But if you don’t give employment, you must give charity, which, of course, the poor resent. Why not give justice, and have happiness all around? Even you Better Americans might be happy at such a sight. If we had production for use, instead of for profit, we should have no crime wave, and we should need no Better America Federations—or Non-partisan Leagues, or “Liberators” either! The great difficulty is to open the eyes and hearts of the powers that be. To that end I shall direct my thought, and support those who are making the fight, to the best of my ability. Proud—yes, proud and unashamed!
KATE CRANE GARTZ.
February 7, 1922.
MR. WOODWARD CLUM,
Better America Federation,
LOS ANGELES, CAL.
Dear Sir: In your latest letter to your subscribers, you have printed part of my letter to you, but why do you not repeat the whole of it? Then they might really know what my sentiments are; and perhaps they could answer some of my statements—which you, evidently, are unable to do. Also, as long as you are mentioning names so freely, why not give the name of that “lady,” who must be as proud of her stand against Max Eastman as I am of my stand for him. Why give me all the credit?
Next time tell them that this terrible “Red” has gone and established a soup-kitchen, right in their very midst for their own thirty thousand unemployed! Would any of them, or their Merchants and Manufacturers, or Chambers of Commerce do as much? Have any of them done it? Why do you not divert your $160,000 a year toward solving the all-important unemployment question? Surely it would be the part of prudence for you to feed the starving at your very doors, instead of leaving it to the “Reds”! Suppose the unemployed should get the idea that we “Reds” are the real “Better Americans,” and their real friends?
Can’t you realize that unemployment is the greatest menace to your B. A. F. institutions? If you want to continue to pose as B. A. F.’s, get busy and see that the state furnishes employment to the unemployed. There is plenty to do with that 93 per cent of government funds which has been used for destruction—that is, for war. In the meantime, feed the unemployed, and clothe them, house them, show them that you really mean to be Better Americans; that “humanity first” is your motto, and not “bigger business.”
Now, why don’t you answer this argument, instead of just abusing the writer?
KATE CRANE GARTZ.
February 27, 1922.
MAYOR GEORGE E. CRYER,
LOS ANGELES, CAL.
Dear Sir: I would come to see you, only I know it would take more of your time than you can probably afford to give. Yet what I have to say is vastly important to Los Angeles as a self-respecting community.
We are on the map now, as a growing progressive city. Let us lead in justice and righteousness and beauty as well as size. Let us think of our back yards first, and the front yards will take care of themselves. I address this to you as the chief housekeeper of our community, knowing no higher power.
The most important complaint I have to make is the terrible injustice of our judiciary system, the chief executioners of which employ common thugs to aid in running down innocent men, many of them high-minded idealists, whose only crime is belonging to an organization which has a perfect right to exist. I have letters every day from mothers whose husbands are yanked off to jail for absolutely nothing. Their homes are broken up, their children sent to orphan asylums, and they are thrust out on the streets. What kind of a human system is that? What right has any court to take away the father and leave the family unsupported and broken, perhaps never to be got together again? How short-sighted is the State to permit and sanction such outrageous injustice in the name of Law and Order!
I am powerless. Can you not suggest to these judges and attorneys that they commune together to the end that they defend rather than prosecute, as was the original intention and basis of all law? We ask for justice, and more and more of it, and that the families of the accused—justly or unjustly—must not suffer.
Next, we advertise ourselves as the land of sunshine and flowers, and we permit all
our railroads to bring all our guests—whom we have invited to come to us by many pages of glowing advertisements—to enter through our back yards and alleys. If we really want to make a good “first impression,” let us at least insist that they be swept clean of refuse, and then perhaps planted.
We need have no unemployed, if we just keep our house in order. Of course, we must feed them and clothe them and house them for our own comfort, because we cannot bear the sight of suffering.
So let us strive for the best within our reach.
Sincerely,
KATE CRANE GARTZ.
March 31, 1922.
EDITOR,
Pasadena Evening Post,
PASADENA, CAL.
Dear Sir: If anything could demonstrate the fact that Pasadena is a “City of Millionaires,” and that they live up to their reputations, it is the fact that “Strife,” by John Galsworthy, is playing to comparatively empty houses. It shows that they do not want the truth about themselves depicted on the stage, or anywhere else. They prefer to be ostriches. They don’t want to see what is coming, or to know that they are the real instigators of discontent and revolution. The rumbles of that discontent are being heard around the world; but the rich do not want to give up one cent of profit—not even to see justice done.
The workers have made it possible for them to live on Orange Grove Avenue and in Oak Knoll; how can you expect the workers to be content to live on the ragged edge of want? Why not listen and learn, and get your pleasure out of trying to make everybody else as happy as you want to be? That can come only when we realize that we are all brothers, and not merely employers and employees. Our rich may be seen in their magnificent churches on Sundays, but they all forget to practice the Golden Rule on Mondays.
Sincerely,
KATE CRANE GARTZ.