Booraem, Alfred W., May 31, 1946.
Revision as of Aug 8, 2017 1:27:58 PM, edited by 220.127.116.11
2 It is self-evident then that; 1. In an aggregation, the separate efforts of individuals at some point will interfere with the rights of others, - This reacts against the welfare of the group, and is most evident in the small community, when the threat to survival is immediate, and time is of the essence. 2. That the rights of all can only be secured by instituting a community-in- law. 3. That failing such community, the only alternative is the continuance of the scramble of the aggregation, with some surviving or profiting at the expense of others i.e.by Exploitation. 4. That there is no natural right to exploit, but on the contrary, the enjoyment of the unalienable rights, implies a defence against exploitation. 5. While legislatures can provide a remedy, if they are dilatory or advers,relief fails, unless it is within the power of the courts to grant relief.
Herbert Spencer, in his Ethics, notes the limitation of the doctrin of the mean, between leaving a neighbor alone or murdering him, the mean of beating him up occasionally is not the solution. There the extremes are truth and falsehood, the mean is not the solution. We have presented essentially, a judicial question, - does exploitation exist, to the injury of the community.
The unalienable rights do not wait upon legislatures or constitutional conventions. (Citation by Judge Dore) . They are derived by induction from the common law, not by deduction from the constitution. (Wilmerding, Pol.Sci. quearterly.Mar.46,p130).
It is important to recognize that exploitation, if unremedied, reacts in time against the community, politically or economically. The regulation of the extremes of supply and demand is recognized in the regulation of monopolies, also in rationing and price control of shortages, and also in regulation of surpluses when low prices produce great loss in purchasing power.
In the last depression, the crisis which resulted in the Mortgage Moratorium Laws, was precipitated by the foreclosure of half a million mortgages, and the resulting disturbance of real estate values. In the East, the stability of banks and mortgage companies was threatened, and in the West, the farmer debtors frankly threatened purchasers at sheriff sales. The net result was the substituting of 4% long term mortgages for 6% short term ones. In earlier depressions, high mortgage rates on farms, contributed to the Granger, Populist and Free Silver movements of the last century. The legality of the foreclosures did not prevent the economic reactions against the community.