=Emerson, Samuel Franklin.= (College Professor.) I am opposed to Socialism because it is a mechanical reconstruction of society, instead of an organic development. Because it is an economic readjustment of society instead of morals. Because it is based upon the essential antagonism of social classes instead of essential co-operation. Because it is a passing reaction against the present transitional system of industry. Because it fails to recognize the importance of the individual in all social movements. Because it would result in a dead social uniformity, instead of a rich social variety. Because its ideal is in reality drawn from the mediaeval and superseded social past, instead of evaluating the forces of the present. Because it is saturated with a false and vicious economic philosophy. Because it misconceives the social function of war, national rivalry and industrial conflict in the social economy. Because it fails to evaluate the spiritual forces of society. * * * * * =Ellis, George Washington.= (Lawyer and Writer.) In so far as Socialistic theory is concerned, beginning in Plato's "Republic," reasserted in Sir Thomas Moore's "Utopia," embraced in the latter part of the eighteenth century in Europe by Fourier, Baboeuf, Saint Simon and Cabet, and later in the United States by Greeley, Dana and Hawthorne, I regard as important contributions to literature, whose chief value is inspirational rather than practical. These theories involve such complete reconstruction and reorganization of society that their attainment are placed far into the indefinite future, yet their value as social and intellectual ideals serve a very useful purpose in human progress. I accept in part what is called Christian Socialism in so far as it desires to bring more and more the Christ-spirit to bear in the commercial and business world, but I am opposed to the substitution of co-operation for competition in the present state of human development. Co-operation may be all right when society has slowly developed by evolution up to the point where competition is not needed to keep economic and social conditions on a natural and normal basis, but under present conditions it leads to economic monopoly and social poverty, as a few selfish and commanding industrial spirits get control of the whole plan of co-operation to the detriment of the great masses. To prevent this situation competition is the greatest natural check on monopoly and one of the best protections of the people. The advocates of this phase of Socialism I think are correct in their contention that Socialistic schemes will not solve the labor problems without that inner development through education and applied Christianity, yet I submit that they are in error when they insist that the powers of the government should not be invoked except to remove hostile legislation.