I do not believe that there is a single re
spectable and intelligent man in Texas, Okla
homa or Georgia who would allow himself
to be called a Socialist, were he aware of the
true inwardness of that despicable creed.
In this paper and in our magazine, I have
been asking the Girard outfit, and other prom
inent Socialists, of national reputation and
representative character, to give the people a
definition of Socialism.
They were challenged to prepare and pub
lish an exposition of what their creed meant
as to —
THE MARRIAGE RELATION,
THE HOME, AN WE KNOW IT,
THE PRESENT SYSTEM OF PRI
VATE OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTY,
RACIAL AND SOCIAL EQUALITY,
RELIGION.
If Debs, Warren and Wayland are honest
men, with nothing to conceal, why shouldn’t
they publish that definition?
THEY DARE NOT DO ITU!
Why? What are they afraid of?
If they should give true answers to my
questions, they woidcl lose all of their country
subscribers.
Not a corporal’s guard of intelligent and
respectable men would stand for it, if the
Appeal should come out from behind its bar
rier of falsehood, and let the people see them
in their true characters.
Jesse L. Swango, of Miami, Oklahoma,
wrote to the Appeal, and inquired why my
challenge to the Socialist leaders to come into
my and debate the creed with me,
was not accepted.
In reply, the Appeal wrote to friend
©he Jeffersonian
Swango that “your hero's challenge to debate
was accepted by Comrade Debs, and Wats op,
immediately “backed water".
Which is utterly untrue. I’m waiting for
‘‘Comrade Debs” right now. I’m hoping that
the “Comrade” will yet pluck up enough
courage to come.
Let the mendacious Appeal send their man
into the ring, without further lies, or delay.
