“Yes”, said Forest, “we first established the principle of equality and then proceeded to arrange our system upon a basis of inequality, thus avoiding an open avowal that the new organization of society was a failure in both theory and practice. The question before us is a very plain one: “_Are we all alike_”? If we are, then communism is the proper form of society and everybody should have an equal share of the products of labor. If we are not alike, if we differ in mental power and in physical ability, if the results of the labor of men are different, then there is no reason, why the wealth of the nation should be equally divided. But we first proclaim equality and pretend that we divide the products of labor equally among all;--and then we divide the “workers into _first_, _second_ and _third grades_, according to _ability_, and these grades are _subdivided_ into _first_ and _second classes_.”[6] Here we see the workers subdivided into six classes for the reason, expressly stated, that their ability _differs_. That their diligence also differs is not admitted, but it is nevertheless the fact. The _inequality_ of men is thus _distinctly recognized_, but the products of labor are _equally_ divided in the name of _equality_! Now, everybody has a natural right to the products of his activity, but we are taking a large share of the results of the labor of a clever worker of class A of the first grade to give it to a lazy fellow of class B of the third grade. This is downright robbery, not even hidden beneath the shabby cloak of the leading principle governing all the acts of the administration; and all those who can not admire this stealing, are denounced as enemies of the best organization of society, ever known in the history of mankind”. [6] Page 125. “You are to a certain extent an admirer of the civilization of the nineteenth century”, I answered; “and yet in our times the employers were accused by some of the labor agitators of “stealing” a large amount of the products of work by reaping very large profits and paying small wages. I would rather favor an equal division of all properties than a system, by which a comparatively small number of employers can enrich themselves at the expense of the masses of the laboring people.”