History of American Socialisms

by John Humphrey Noyes

A prominent New England journal in an elaborate obituary on the late Henry J. Raymond, after mentioning that he was an efficient assistant of Mr. Greeley on the Tribune, from the commencement of that paper in 1841 till he withdrew and took service on the Courier and Enquirer, went on to say:

"It was at the time of Mr. Raymond's withdrawal from it, that the Tribune, which was speedily joined by George Ripley and Charles A. Dana, fresh from Brook Farm, had its Fourieristic phase."

The mistakes in this paragraph are remarkable, and ought not to be allowed any chance of getting into history.

In the first place Ripley and Dana did not thus immediately succeed Raymond on the Tribune. The American Cyclopædia says that Raymond left the Tribune and joined Webb on the Courier and Enquirer in 1843. But Ripley and Dana retained their connection with Brook Farm till October 30, 1847, and continued to edit the Harbinger in New York till February 10, 1849, as we know by the files of that paper in our possession. They could not have joined the Tribune before the first of these dates, and probably did not till after the last; so that there was an interval of from three to six years between Raymond's leaving and their joining the Tribune.

But the most important error of the above quoted paragraph is its implication that the "Fourieristic phase" of the Tribune was after Raymond left it, and was owing to the advent of Ripley and Dana "fresh from Brook Farm." The truth is, that the Tribune had become the organ of Mr. Brisbane, the importer of Fourierism, in March 1842, less than a year from its commencement (which was on April 10, 1841); and of course had its "Fourieristic phase" while Raymond was employed on it, and in fact before Ripley and Dana had been converted to Fourierism. Brook Farm, be it ever remembered, was originally an independent Yankee experiment, started in 1841 by the suggestion of Dr. Channing, and did not accept Fourierism till the winter of 1843-4. During the entire period of Brisbane's promulgations in the Tribune, which lasted more than a year, and which manifestly caused the great Fourier excitement of 1843, Brook Farm had nothing to do with Fourierism, except as it was being carried away with the rest of the world, by Brisbane and the Tribune. Thus it is certain that Ripley and Dana did not bring Fourierism into the Tribune, but on the contrary received Fourierism from the Tribune, during the very period when Raymond was assisting Greeley. When they joined the Tribune in 1847-9, Fourierism was in the last stages of defeat, and the most that they or Greeley or any body else did for it after that, was to help its retreat into decent oblivion.

The obituary writer probably fell into these mistakes by imagining that the controversy between Greeley and Raymond, which occurred in 1846, while Raymond was employed on the Courier and Enquirer, was the principal "Fourieristic phase" of the Tribune. But this was really an after-affair, in which Greeley fought on the defensive as the rear-guard of Fourierism in its failing fortunes; and even this controversy took place before Brook Farm broke up; so that Ripley and Dana had nothing to do with it.

The credit or responsibility for the original promulgation of Fourierism through the Tribune, of course does not belong to Mr. Raymond; though he was at the time (1842) Mr. Greeley's assistant. But neither must it be put upon Messrs. Ripley and Dana. It belongs exclusively to Horace Greeley. He clearly was Brisbane's other and better half in the propagation of Fourierism. For practical devotion, we judge that he deserves even the first place on the roll of honor. We doubt whether Brisbane himself ever pledged his property to Association, as Greeley did in the following address, published in the Harbinger, October 25, 1845:

"As one Associationist who has given his efforts and means freely to the cause, I feel that I have a right to speak frankly. I know that the great number of our believers are far from wealthy; yet I know that there is wealth enough in our ranks, if it were but devoted to it, to give an instant and resistless influence to the cause. A few thousand dollars subscribed to the stock of each existing Association would in most cases extinguish the mortgages on its property, provide it with machinery and materials, and render its industry immediately productive and profitable. Then manufacturing invention and skill would fearlessly take up their abode with our infant colonies; labor and thrift would flow thither, and a new and brighter era would dawn upon them. Fellow Associationists! I shall do whatever I can for the promotion of our common cause; to it whatever I have or may hereafter acquire of pecuniary ability is devoted: may I not hope for a like devotion from you?

"H.G."