On June 2, 1855, the _Texas State Gazette_ again called the attention of the people of Texas to the serious danger which confronted the citizens of the state by permitting the socialists to establish themselves among the people. In an article, “The Socialist in Texas,” the paper declared: We have had enough discussion of the principles of Socialism from Greeley, Brisbane, and other fanatics and abolitionists, to know what Socialism must be in Texas, and how it will finally end. When men get tired of the glorious institutions of our republic, there is something wrong with them, themselves, radically. They are certainly good enough to protect us in our life, our liberty and pursuit of happiness. Whatever may be their _new views_, they are at least not the class of men to do a state any good. We have had occasion before to allude to the importation of foreign Socialists into Texas, and the opinions we have expressed have certainly undergone no change. We believe them to be a mischievous element of population, and did we not believe that their wild theories would not long stand the test of experiment, and would soon be abandoned, we might urge our objections more seriously than we have done. In the same article was a letter from a man who signed himself J.L. from the city of Washington. The writer of the letter mentioned that he had seen a short article in a northern paper in which the attitude of the _Gazette_, as expressed in a former editorial, was very unfavorable to the “settlement of a colony of Fourierestes under the auspices of M. Considerant,” in Texas. He appealed to the “Southerners of Texas, not to permit that band of lawless and unprincipled foreigners to settle in their midst,” and listed reasons why his appeal should be heeded as follows: 1. That it is the purpose of the Socialists to overthrow all constituted government and establish instead a system in which the members would “follow the tendencies of their passions and inclinations regardless of any restraint of laws.” 2. That they were opposed to the Christian code of morals as stated in the decalogue, because that would check their passional liberty. 3. That they were all infidels. 4. That they condemned marriage relations and wherever they dared to do so, “openly avow promiscuous intercourse of sexes, accordingly.” 5. That they were abolitionists of the most vile stamp. 6. That they would divert individual property to their own peculiar organizations.[8]