Rnnk . C)(ps GopightN" COPYRIGHT DEPOSm KINGS OF WEALTH VS. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE A TREATISE ON POLITICAL-ECONOMIC CONDITIONS AS THEY EXIST IN THE UNITED STATES TO-DAY, WITH A REMEDY FOR IMPROVING THEM BY EDWARD N. OLLY AUTHOR OF ''MUTUAL OWNERSHIP VS. PRIVATE MONOPOLY,' "limitation OF WEALTH," ETC. Dear Mr. Oily : "I must say I am very much | impressed with your theory." {Mayor) W. J.IGaynor. Copyright, 1913, by Edward N. Olly NEW YORK J. S. OGILVIE PUBLISHING COMPANY 57 Rose Street .06 ©CI.A358675 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGI FOREWORD 7 PROPOSED LAW OF LIMITED OWNERSHIP ii CHAPTER I.— UNLIMITED PRIVATE PROP- ERTY—A PREMIUM ON GREED. Dame Fortune and a Rag Picker. — Might of Greed. — Modern Banker and Marcus Crassus. — Valued In^ stitution of Private Property. — Rights of Men are Limited. — Property Rights are Unlimited. — Uncle Sara Unnatural Parent. — Grab-It-AU Monstrosities. —Premium on Greed. — Reign of Millionairism 15 CHAPTER II.— NATION'S WEALTH LIMITED, PRIVATE PROPERTY UNLIMITED. Wealth vs. Poverty.— Wealth Is Not Gold.— Mil- lionaires Own Wealth, Not Currency. — National Wealth Is Limited. — Possibilities Are Limitless. — Wealth Is Limited by Purchasing Power of the People. — Prosperity Depends on Purchasing Power of the People. — Wealth of Robinson Crusoe. — Ob- ject Lesson from Crusoe's Island 51 CHAPTER III.— UNLIMITED UNEARNED PROF- ITS, UNLIMITED EVIL. Equitable Distribution. Basis of Prosperity. — Two Channels of Distribution of Wealth. — Profitable Fac- tory of Master Gwynne. — Exploitation of Two Sets of Workers. — Should Profits Be Abolished? — Profits on Limited Private Property Are Justifiable. — Limited Inheritance Is Also Justifiable. — Necessary Evil Need Not Become Unlimited Evil. — American Bacchanalia of Profit-Gathering. — Profits of a Cap- italist Are Always Unearned. — Workers Are Ex- cluded from Participation in Profits. — Let Everyone Get What He Deserves 48 3 5j CONTENTS PAGE CHAPTER IV.— PRIVATE MONOPOLY, FOE TO CIVILIZATION. Enigma of Progress and Poverty. — Marvels of Mod- ern Production. — Production Cheaper, Prices Artifi- cially Higher. — A Reactionary Force Stops Progress of Civilization. — Americans Are Paying Millions in Tribute. — Who Is the Enemy? — Ceaseless Flow of Tribute to Monopolists. — Trusts Are Advance Guards of Civilization. — The Souls of Trusts Are Guilty. — Monopolistic Shareholding Illustrated. — To- bacco, Railroad and Steel Kings. — Trust Owners Are XXth Century Machiavellis. — The Remarkable Beef Autocrat. — Cold Storage Trust Cornering Perish- able Food. — Private Refrigerating Car Monopoly.-— Butter and Egg Board. — Milk Trust Taxing Ameri- can Babies. — Prices Doubled and Trebled by the Trusts. — Modern Holocaust of Coffee. — Monopo- lized Railroads, Allies of Trusts. — Dry Goods Trust Denouncing Its Brethren. — Industrial Millionairism Is Undesirable 72 CHAPTER v.— UNEMPLOYMENT, QUESTION OF LIFE OR DEATH FOR MILLIONS. Unemployment Is Unknown Among Animals and Savaris. — Capital and Labor, Unnatural Twins. — Civilization Begets Unemployment. — Pilgrim Fa- thers, Vanguard of the Unemployed. — Artificial Overcrowding Causes Unemployment. — Does Ma- chinery Create Unemployment? — Inventions Do Not Benefit Majority of the People. — Machines Benefit Their Owners.^ — Monopolized Machinery Is Harm- ing the People. — Unemployment Must Increase Enormously. — Rockefeller's Remedy for Unemploy- ment. — Napoleonic Solution of the Problem of Un- employment. — Demand for Bread and Games by Roman Unemployed. — Egyptian Pyramid Builders. — Summary of the Causes and the Remedy no CHAPTER VI.— NATURE'S UNIVERSAL LAW OF LIMITATION. Harmony of the Whole Is Ultimate Aim of Every- thing. — Law^ of Limitation Exemplified in Human Body. — Limited Ownership Preserved in a Family. — Beneficial Homestead Act. — Industrial Policy of Go- CONTENTS 5 PAGE As-You-Please. — Limited Business Ownership, In- dustrial Homestead Act 138 CHAPTER VII.— LIMITED PRIVATE OWNER- SHIP, THE REMEDY. Limited Ownership in Savings Banks. — Limited Ownership in Building and Loan Associations. — Mutual Benefit Organizations. — Giant Companies on Basis of Limited Shareholding. — Large Enterprises Without Aid of Millionaire Shareholders. — Nylic vs. Standard Oil. — Limited Ownership vs. Private Monopoly. — Limited Ownership, the Remedy. — Bal- lot Is the Only Weapon We Need 149 CHAPTER VIII.— ARGUMENTS AGAINST AND FOR LIMITED PRIVATE OWNERSHIP. How Would Law of Limited Ownership Benefit "Me"?— A Quarter Million Dollars Not Enough.— Principle of Limitation Is Un-American. — Limited Ownership Would Stifle Ambition and Curb Energy. — Millionaires and Capital Would Leave the Coun- try. — The People Are Not Rich Enough to Purchase Property of Millionaires. — Enterprises of Million- aires Benefit the People. — Millionaires Are Employ- ing Thousands of People. — Limited Ownership Law Will Be Evaded. — The Law Is Impracticable, and Will Be Ineffective. — Limited Ownership Indorsed by Prominent Men. — Unlimited Wealth vs. Unlim- ited Poverty. — Millionaires Wield Unlimited Power of Real Sovereigns. — The Final Appeal 168 FOREWORD I am not a Socialist. I am an individualist, who believes in the right of individuals to own a comfort- able though limited private property, without en- croaching upon the great democratic principle, "The greatest good for the greatest number." I believe that everything in modern society is as it should be, except the unlimited private ownership of property, which is the root of all evil and the chief cause that forces the whole nation to labor in the wrong direction, namely, toward "the greatest good for the smallest number," — for the kings of wealth and their heirs. The American people are becoming restive. They obviously are weary of perennial tariff discussions, spectacular trust dissolutions, and other similar make- shifts which achieve next to nothing. They are en- titled to, and are looking for, a radical economic meas- ure, which will emancipate them from industrial ty- ranny. For want of something better, they are begin- ning to support the plausible yet somewhat vague theory of Socialism. Although the unnatural privilege conferred upon individuals to own and derive unearned profits from 7a 8 FOREWORD unlimited private possessions is the primary cause of all evil in modern society, — yet the remedy proposed by Socialists is also unnatural, because it presents the other extreme. The unwise rule practiced by us is : "Private property shall be unlimited." The Socialistic remedy holds forth: "Private property shall be abolished." Meanwhile, the safe and sound mid- dle course is ignored: "Private property need be neither unlimited nor abolished; it must be limited by law!" Socialists believe that in order to remedy the in- equitable distribution of our nation's wealth it is necessary to establish a gigantic governmental monop- oly, which would own, manage and distribute every- thing. Such extreme centralization is expected to bring the millennium. Yet, assuming that it would do so, is it not evident that many hundreds of years must pass before such a giant reform can be realized? Meantime, what are the multitudes of steadily impov- erished and unemployed Americans to do? Must they continue to suffer under the dominion of the Kings of Wealth and patiently wait until the Socialistic mil- lennium descends to the earth from the visionary Socialistic clouds? A cheerless prospect. I believe it is our duty not to supinely wait until So* cialistic evolution (more likely revolution) becomes a fact, but to enact laws which would bring immediate relief to wronged multitudes. Without presenting any "looking backward" pic- tures of imaginary heaven on earth, I merely venture FOREWORD 9 to appeal to the sense of justice of such J.^ United States as love fair play, and desire t-r ''^- press upon them the imperative necessity ot hm- iting — not abolishing — the right of inarviuuaiS co ac- cumulate private possessions, and of curbing thereby the present unlimited private gathering of unearned profits. Let us not continue to remain blind to the evil that saps the life-blood of this nation. The institution of unlimited private ownership of property works great injustice to the majority of our population. This time- worn iniquity and relic of barbarism has no justifica- tion whatever; it should be endured no longer; it should be done away with, forever and ever. It should be limited by law. While reasonably moderate private property has al- ways been a blessing to mankind, in its unreasonably unlimited form it is its curse ! In order to prevent a possible misunderstanding, I wish to state here that I am far from being in favor of prohibiting combinations of private capital. In fact, I am convinced that under proper guidance great com- binations are advance-guards of progress and civiliza- tion. But they are of real benefit to the "greatest number" only when they are owned by millions of shareholders (as are our mutual savings banks, build- ing and loan associations, etc.) and NOT BY A FEW MULTIMILLIONAIRES, as they are owned at the present time. Then only the profits from them belong 10 FOREWORD to millions, and not to a few privilegeci persons "on the inside." This subject is fully discussed in Chap- ters IV and yil of this work. EDWARD N. OLLY. Hasbrouck Heights, N. J., Dec. i, 1913. (THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ,n PROPOSED LAW OF LIMITED PRIVATE OWNERSHIP Pursuant to the Fifth Article of the Constitution, Congress should submit the following amendment for ratification by the States: Section i. In order to safeguard the interests of the majority, the individual private ownership of any prop- erty situated in the United States shall he limited to a certain definite iigure, the extent of which shall he pre- scribed hy Congress. Section 2. The inheritance of such property and the acquisition of it through gift hy individuals shall also he limited, in like manner, to a certain definite iigure. Section 3. Congress shall have the power to enforce this article hy appropriate legislation. Congress would thus be authorized to limit private possessions of individuals to any extent found reason- able and advisable. Such limit may be A QUARTER OF A MILLION OF DOLLARS as a maximum in- dividual ownership, and A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS as a maximum for inheritance or acqui- sition through gift ; or any other figure which Congress may agree upon. Such legislation will leave intact society as it is constituted at present, but it will speedily remove the cancer of the social body, — the multimillionairism. 12 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. Is it not plain that, when ar • ^.dividual is prohibited from appropriating everything ir. sight, more wealth will be left to go around among the rest of the people? Is it not evident that the enactment of such a law is not a reactionary but a progressive measure, not a revolutionary but a matter-of-fact business proposi- tion ; denying neither the right of property nor the privilege of deriving therefrom a reasonable income; recommending neither confiscation nor a general breaking-up of the so-called "capitalistic system"; ac- cepting everything as it is in operation at the pres- ent time and taking exception solely to the unnatural and extremely harmful privilege of individuals to own and profit by unlimited private possessions, a privi- lege which was granted them in ignorant defiance of the plainly discernible will of the Creator, Who de- creed that all things in this world should be limited to the extent of their utmost efficiency and usefulness? Upon the enactment of this law, private possessions should be registered and their owners informed that they may not increase their wealth beyond the pre- scribed limit. Confiscation is neither justifiable nor necessary. As the law will prohibit inheritances by individuals in excess of the stipulated amount, — say, $100,000, — the immense accumulations of the billion- aires of the period will be, upon their demise, dis- tributed among a great many heirs and other bene- ficiaries, none receiving more than a hundred thousand dollars. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 13 In this way a widely diffused and infinitely more equitable distribution of our national wealth will be- come an established fact WITHIN THE LIFETIME OF A SINGLE GENERATION! Let us vote for no CANDIDATE FOR CONGRESS unless he pledges himself to the enactment of the LAW OF LIMITED PRIVATE OWNERSHIP. Kings of Wealth vs. The American People / CHAPTER I iJnlimited Private Property — A Premium on Greed DAME FORTUNE AND A RAG-PICKER Once upon a time a forlorn rag-picker, engaged in the pursuit of his humble occupation, grumbled aloud about his lot in life. "I cannot understand," said he, "how those people who live in fine houses, and have all the luxuries that wealth can supply, are still anxious to have more and more riches. Such avarice is inexcusable. I certainly would be satisfied, and would never hanker for more." The Goddess of Wealth, attracted by his senti^ ments, determined to make an experiment. She ap- peared before him in person, filled his bag with gold, and said: "Thou art now immensely wealthy. Is it enough for thee?" The beggar looked greedily at the well-filled bag, and then at the smiling Goddess, and replied : "Noble lady, may I not have just a little more of that beau- tiful gold?" IS l6 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. "Very well," said Dame Fortune sternly, "but first try to lift thy bag, thou greedy mortal." Reluctantly and surlily, the beggar folded the flaps of his huge bag and made the attempt to throw it over his shoulder, when, alas, the bag burst and its precious contents fell with a thud to the ground, and the bright coins, scattered in all directions, turned immediately into dust. The poor beggar looked up in great consternation, but Dame Fortune had vanished, and he found him- self alone, forsaken, and infinitely more wretched than he had ever been before in the course of his miserable existence. MIGHT OF GREED Greed is not a quality, but a defect in human nature, a failing which ought to be discouraged, and not otherwise. Greed is a passion akin to gambling: the gambler can seldom stop at a certain limit ; neither can a greedy man curb his greed, unless he is compelled so to do. Greed reduces man to a rank below dumb animals; the brute knows when he has had enough; a greedy man does not. Greed is mighty. It forces men to violate their best intentions, to forget their sincere resolutions, and to trample heartlessly upon the rights of others, during their wild chase after more wealth. Greed, once grasping a man in its clutches, renders him more dangerous to society than a wild beast. 'A THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 17 beast may devour a man or two ; a man possessed by greed devours indirectly, but no less surely, thousands of lives by depriving men of their means of existence, and by driving them to degradation and an early grave. Greed has presumably an ugly aspect and is con- demned by moralists and abhorred by all. Yet, strange to say, all attempts at muzzling the monster have, so far, invariably failed. The twentieth century finds it roaming at large unrespected, yet unimpeded and at its very zenith of gruesome glory and power. What else but a direct prohibitory law of limited private ownership will ever be able to subdue the monster? It should also be borne in mind that greed is a ma- lignant disease which may be cured, and should not be endured ; still less should it be encouraged. The people alone, in their supreme right and might, are able to loosen the grim hold of greed upon this land's resources, which surely are large enough and rich enough for all to have a fair share ! THE MODERN BANKER AND MARCUS CRASSUS A great banker once said: "I feel certain that if I were landed on a desert island with one hundred men, each of whom had a thousand dollars, I would soon get hold of most of their money. How? Simply by trading: buy when others are anxious to sell, and i8 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. sell when others are anxious to buy. That's the way to get rich !" One cannot help being deeply impressed by the supreme cold-bloodedness of this assertion. The banker evidently is altogether indifferent to the ethical side of the proceeding, to the lack of morality in ap- propriating "most of the money" of his fellow-men, who happen not to be as clever financiers as he. He also is blind to the miserable condition in which his weaker brethren must find themselves after their means of existence had been legally abstracted from them. Yet, were not such methods of "getting rich" approved by a short-sighted human (rather inhuman) law, the described spongelike transaction would have been considered both immoral and criminal. Inspired by greed, our foremost money-makers close their eyes and turn deaf ear to the woe and misery which they undoubtedly spread broadcast all through the land. Do they really consider their fellow-men as unfeeling, as so many mechanical automatons, who are devoid of any unpleasant sensation while "most of their money," their means of existence, is taken aWay from them? Such are the deplorable results of the remarkable mastery exercised by the monster greed over men who are otherwise good and well-meaning. Greed is not a modern phenomenon ; it is as ancient as mankind. Plutarch testifies that twenty centuries ago, namely in 60 B.C., a certain Marcus Crassus, who THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 19 with Pompey and Julius Caesar formed the first Tri- umvirate of masters of Rome, "had a vice of avarice that cast a shadow upon his virtues." For instance, "Noticing frequent conflagrations in Rome, he made it his business to buy houses on fire, and others adjoin- ing to them, at a very low price, by reason of fear and distress of the owners about the event. . . ." "Hence, he became master of a great part of Rome." A complete analogy with the modern Marcus Cras- sus: bought when others were anxious to sell, "by reason of fear and distress," and thus appropriated the "most of the money" of his fellow-citizens. Lack of any restraint upon greed produces to-day the same results as it did twenty centuries ago. Describing further, Plutarch says that during his political campaigns Marcus Crassus entertained the Roman populace lavishly, often at 10,000 tables, and every now and then distributed among the prole- tariat a supply of free bread corn sufficient to last them for three months! However, Mr. Crassus con- sidered these seemingly benevolent expenditures as very profitable investments, for they gave him an op- portunity to make by subsequent graft (of Roman variety, on a large scale) much more than he ever expended on the entertainments. Marcus Crassus was in the habit of abstracting people's money by various methods which often re- flected strongly upon his "virtues." For instance, he was known to have proscribed men for no other reason but to seize upon their fortunes. 20 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. So much for the commercial ideals of those possessed by greed, whether in olden times or at this day. Various, indeed, are the ways by which a greedy man despoils his brethren. Should it not be the sacred duty of society to pro- tect its weaker members against the greedy ones? So- ciety certainly should curb the avaricious, as a father restrains those of his children who show symptoms of selfishness and greed. It is not enough to punish the transgressor. The possibility of transgressions should be prevented; greed should be checked; certain limits of restraint should be put upon it. Unlimited ownership, as an institution, is an incen- tive for greed : far from restraining it, it stimulates a display of most selfish avarice. Should it be toler- ated as a GREED-ENCOURAGER? VALUED INSTITUTION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY A child never enjoys his toy unless he knows it is his own, "to keep." This conception "to keep" is magical. A boy without an air rifle is not a happy boy. He may obtain the privilege of playing with a rifle be- longing to one of his playmates, but he will not be as contented as the happy owner of the rifle. For the owner of a thing knows that he may do with it what- ever pleases him. The consciousness of the fact gives him great satisfaction. Certainly a flat dweller in a THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 21 crowded city cannot enjoy his hired "home" as heart- ily as does his more fortunate fellow-man who resides in his own homestead. The consciousness of owner- ship imparts to the latter the same feeling of content- ment that is enjoyed by that boy owner of an air rifle. Human nature is the same everywhere. The long"- ing to own is ever-present in a human being. Child- hood longs to own its toys ; youth, a sweetheart ; man- hood, a home; and old age, its last resting place. The institution of private property, based upon hu- man nature as its solid foundation, is the earliest and the most invincible among the rights of individuals. Nothing is resented so much as an attack on this "vested" right, and nothing more readily brings men together than the necessity of defending this cherished right. The right so valued, so purely human, is destined to stay with us for ages to come, unless we grow as affectionate toward our neighbors as are the mem- bers of a family (or ought to be) toward each other. The prospect of such a millennium is not very bright, as yet. It is useless to deny the permanency of the institu- tion of private property. Many well-meaning men have essayed to do so, and tried to prove the advis- ability of its entire abolishment, or at least partial substitution. But they signally failed in their at- tempts. The right of property is with us to-day the same 29 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. at it Was centuries ago. It is wise to accept it as a fact. But it is no less wise to closely inquire into its nature and workings, and correct its faults if it has any. Being human, not divine, it is liable to have some imperfections. In fact, it has a vital im- perfection: IT IS LIMITLESS! RIGHTS OF MEN ARE LIMITED The rights and privileges of men are restricted by the laws governing civilized societies. A man may freely exercise his freedom of speech, for instance; but he may not use that freedom to any extent he pleases ; he may not shout at the top of his voice on a public thoroughfare, nor even in his own house ; in both cases he would be liable to arrest for disturbing the peace of the community. Man is enjoying free- dom of conscience, of meetings, of the press ; and has an indisputable right to enjoy his liberty and pursue his happiness. Yet there are restrictions on every side of him. He may not obstruct highways, nor get intoxicated in public; may not get married without a license, nor take the law into his own hands; he may not even dispose of his own life by selling himself to any one, or by self-destruction. In short, man's will has always been subordinated to that of society. Man's education as a free citizen consists in ascertaining, and retaining in memory, the limits to his liberty, which are imposed upon him out of consideration for the corresponding freedom and rights of his fellow- men. iTHE AMERICAN PEOPLE 23 The same can not be said of the right of property. Aside from a few limitations, relating to the manner of its exercise, this right of individuals is absolutely unlimited. PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE UNLIMITED To the right of property, — and to this right alone, — the principle of go-as-you-please has ever been and is to-day freely applied. If a man be sufficiently clever he may acquire and own, with the sanction of and under the protection of the law, a million of acres, or a thousand millions, or any amount of acres of Amer- ican soil. If he has wealth enough he may purchase and hold millions upon millions' worth of shares in any trusts or mergers ; he may acquire and hold any quantity of property and land, a State or two, or the whole United States, for that matter. No one would be able to deny his legal right to do so. Such an event will perhaps never take place. Yet the mere possibility of such an occurrence is startling by its enormity and absurdity. It certainly is possible and would be legal for any extra-clever trust to become by purchase the sole owner and profit-taker of all the railroads in this country, of all the shipping, mines, etc. As far as the acquisition of property is concerned, there has never been shown the slightest consideration for the similar rights of less clever citizens, unless it were the prohibition of downright robbery or theft. Aside from that it is understood and agreed that this 24 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. really licentious right should be hampered by no re- strictions, no limitations. Does anything more glaringly unnatural exist in human society? Pharaohs of ancient Egypt, as well as other anointed chiefs, owned all the land and other property of their "subjects" because it was understood to have been so ordained by right divine. To-day, when the right divine is set aside, the permission for anyone who is clever enough and rich enough to acquire and legally hold, as his own private property, anything and every- thing that may please him, — even were it a whole country, — is, to say the least, devoid of any justifica- tion and so unnatural as to approach the ridiculous. Such a right, — or rather special privilege, — ceases to be human. No man, no matter how deserving and clever, can ever possibly earn such a fabulous reward for his cleverness; can ever have the moral right to unlimited possessions. Moreover, such a right is a direct defiance of nature's supreme law of limitation, and, as such, is bound to create disastrous conditions in the society of men. "UNCLE SAM" AN UNNATURAL PARENT A loving mother, treating her children to a home- made pie, watches carefully that no one may take more than his or her rightful share. She may some- times show partiality by putting an extra dainty morsel upon the plate of her particular pet, — usually THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 25 the youngest or the weakest among her children. But who ever heard of a parent so heartless and cruel as to give nine-tenths of a pie to a pet or two and leave only a pittance for all the other children? Yet such an unnatural parent is well known to us. Uncle Sam, through simplicity of mind and careless- ness of thought, or, more likely, through ignorance, has actually given away to a few of his special favor- ites almost everything worth having. He has heart- lessly left for the remaining multitudes a mere pit- tance to scramble for. Instead of protecting the weak and helping the less favored, he has so framed the laws of the land that it is the strongest and the cleverest that receive "pro- tection" to their hearts' content, while the weaker and less gifted members of his family are abandoned to shift for themselves. As a natural result, the indus- trial geniuses have scrupulously followed the advice of the above quoted modern banker, and have absorbed "most of the wealth" of the American people as easily as sponges absorb water! Instead of setting a barrier to avarice. Uncle Sam has given it complete freedom, legalized it, and is awarding the richest prizes to those who are most avaricious. A truly abnormal proceeding! When we read of some pompous king of old be- stowing upon his minions royal grants to immense territories in the New World we can scarcely sup- press a pitying smile : the imbecility of the transac- tion appears to us most ludicrous. Perhaps, at some 26 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. future time, an historian, while perusing the records of the twentieth century, may also be unable to sup- press a pitying smile when he learns how the sov- ereign people of America had given away to a few Kings of Wealth many regal grants for countless millions of American wealth, leaving for themselves only perpetual poverty to struggle against. Per- haps the simplicity of the transaction will appear to him also ludicrous, or worse. Thus the right of private property is, in its prin- ciple and foundation, natural and human ; in its "limit- less" application, — unnatural and harmful. In the first instance it is the source of happiness; in the second of misery. History amply testifies that the institu- tion of unlimited private property had converted this world, many a time, into a huge slaughter house ! GRAB-IT-ALL MONSTROSITIES A limitless privilege of the same nature can be found in no other sphere of organic life. Nothing like it exists among animals; not even among the wild beasts of the wilderness. Although a primitive ''fist- right" of the strongest is there freely exercised, it is naturally limited to the acquisition of food and pos- session of dens ; while similar privileges of other ani- mals are instinctively respected. Grab-it-all mon- strosities are unknown even among the fiercest of wild animals. Nowhere on earth is it known save among men! iTHE AMERICAN PEOPLE 27 Who has ever heard of a tiger claiming the entire jungle as his own private property? Or of a family of buffaloes laying claim to the exclusive ownership of the whole Mississippi Valley? Or of a greedy bear appropriating as his own absolute property all the honey to be found in the United States? Yet there is a man, a reputably good and Christian man, who calmly asserts that all the oil that can be found in the United States is his own personal prop- erty. There are other men and families, all enlight- ened human beings, who claim that most of the rail- roads of the land are their own exclusive property. And there are many other men and families of the same ilk. Some of them claim private ownership of all the sugar of Uncle Sam; others of all the coffee; still others claim the ownership of all the products of the tobacco industry, etc., etc. Guided solely by instinct, the beast of the wilder- ness, having satisfied his thirst and hunger, respects the right to life and pursuit of happiness in his fellow beasts. Not so man. Although endowed with a much superior intellect, yet possessed by greed, he pursues the most selfish policy of amassing riches for his own personal aggrandizement, and in such pursuit he gives no thought to the rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness vested in his fellow-men ; he ruthlessly pushes them aside from his path of conquest, appro- priates "most of their money," and complacently re- marks: "That is the way to get rich." In this way, thanks to that unhallowed relic of bar- 28 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. barism, the unlimited property right, man has fallen below the level of the wild beasts of the wilderness ! PREMIUM ON GREED Was Dame Fortune right in limiting her bounty to the ragpicker? Or would it h- ve been better had she given him another bag of gold, and still another; nay, millions of bags, until his apparently unlimited greed would have been at last satiated? Being a fair- minded goddess, she could not have done so, because then she would have rewarded greed. What are we, as a nation, doing in this respect? Are we protecting the weaker members of society against the encroachments of the stronger, and by so doing are we checking the depredations of the mon- ster greed? Not at all. We are actually doing the reverse: we are protecting the stronger against the weaker; we are offering rich rewards for the practice of selfish aggrandizement and greed; in fact, we are giving a PREMIUM ON GREED. Dame Fortune rewarded the ragpicker for his good intentions, and punished him for the display of un- reasonable greed. That is as it should be. But it hap- pened in a fable; in reality it is quite different: the greedier the man, the more he wants and the more he is given. If millions of bags of gold are not enough for him — if he still wants more and more — he is at liberty to appropriate anything and everything. An absurd permission, is it not? THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 29 Anyone can perceive that what Dame Fortune did was right, and what we are doing is wrong. We should let the clever man have his big bag of gold, but should say to him: *'Thou canst have no more, for there are others who also are desirous and en- titled to share in the national possessions." Then only the greedy one would have been compelled to curb his greed and stop "hankering for more/' for the obvious reason that that "more" would not be forth- coming. Thus the premium on greed would have been abolished. Such would have been the only right way to protect the weaker members of society against their stronger and shrewder brethren. REIGN OF MILLIONAIRISM How far from such a desirable condition is the pres^ ent state of affairs in the United States! Of all the countries in the world, the United States are presenting at this time the most vivid picture of an up-to-date millionairism. With us this "million- airism" is truly grand. A few excessively wealthy persons own such fabulous fortunes as were never before even dreamed of. The incomes of some of them are reaching the stupendous figure of a million dollars a week! Such an income is one thousand times larger than the annual salary of the Chief Ex- ecutive of the nation! Even the fairy tales of childhood are outdone by the frenzied reign of modern American millionairism. 30 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. The wealth of an average multimillionaire equals the combined holdings of two hundred thousand of his less favored fellow Americans ! Verily, truth is stranger than fiction. Five thousand American millionaires own in aggre- gate more wealth than all the rest of us. The nations of the old world have had one king each; we have five thousand of them! Statistics show that a large portion of the United States is the private property of millionaires. The question arises: how soon will the entire United States become their private property? Their foretype, Marcus Crassus of Rome, succeeded in becoming the owner of the "most part of Rome" ; why not a Rocke- feller of the near future be in a position to become the owner of the whole of the United States ? Is it not remarkable that our industrial kings are still "hankering for more"? Spurred by that dread power, greed, they have entered into all kinds of com- binations and conspiracies, lawful and otherwise, created the now infamous trusts and monopolies, in- jected oceans of water into industrial stocks, and ac- quired the ownership or control of everything worth mentioning. Yet still they want "more." Meanwhile, the people, the supposed owners and real producers of the nation's wealth, are receiving as their share of that immense wealth a portion which is hardly sufficient to keep their body and soul to- gether. Such are the fruits of unlimited private ownership ! JHE AMERICAN PEOPLE 31 CHAPTER II Nation's Wealth Limited — Private Property Unlimited WEALTH VS. POVERTY Diamonds, rubies, pearls and emeralds by the bushel- ful; gold, silver, cobalt, quicksilver by the carloads; trainloads of costly velvets, silks, laces, paintings, cutglass; hundreds of trainloads of iron, steel, lead, coal, cotton, wool, grain, meat and fruit; millions of horses, cows, sheep, hogs, fowl and game ; inland seas, great rivers, wonderful canals, primeval forests; bil- lions of acres of land available for cultivation ; magnifi- cent public and private buildings and palaces; beauti- ful churches, mammoth hotels and many-storied busi- ness offices; perfect means of communication and transportation; numberless automobiles, yachts, aero- planes ; and countless myriads of other valuable things that make life enjoyable ; — such is this enchanted land of ours, the veritable realm of wealth ! Such a bird's-eye view of American wealth may create the impression that we have reached the high- est point of prosperity and happiness ; that with such enormous wealth in our possession we cannot harbor among us such an ungainly thing as poverty ; and that certainly thousands of roving tramps and hundreds of thousands of the "slowly starving" unemployed cannot possibly be found amidst all that glorious abun- dance. 32 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. Alas, we know better! The apparently improbable co-existence of Plenty and Want, of Progress and Poverty, is in full evidence in our land. Splendid wealth and unsightly poverty stand side by side, grimly eyeing each other; wealth with a look of ill- concealed contempt and abhorrence; poverty, — with the submissively sullen look of a dependent. Wealth would dearly like to get rid of its ragged companion; but poverty clings to it like grim death, and, — so we are told, — must remain with us forever, as a fixed institution. Such an uninviting picture is plainly seen in our large cities, where wealth is at its best and poverty at its worst. Although in a somewhat modified and softened form, the same is observable in smaller towns, in villages, and throughout the whole land. The condition is certainly abnormal. One cannot be prosperous and poor at the same time. Either the American people are prosperous or they are not. The volume of wealth and the reputed prosperity indicate that they are; the presence of poverty argues that they are not. Poverty gives the lie to prosperity! A family cannot be considered prosperous when any of its members feel the pinch of poverty; how much less so if most of them are in a similar plight! We, as a large family of human beings, have no right to consider ourselves prosperous while a single case of unmerited poverty exists in our land. Still less are we entitled to the claim of general prosperity when millions of our fellow citizens, able and willing to THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 33 work, remain almost constantly in enforced idleness and in the clutches of poverty. Only after poverty entirely disappears and is heard of no longer may we say, with well-earned pride: "We Americans are a prosperous people." Not till then! Poverty is that discord which destroys harmony in human society. In fact, as long as poverty re- mains in our midst, harmony is impossible, and the whole of society presents a huge discord. Therefore, our warcry should be : "Down with pov- erty !" We should declare against it a war of extermi- nation, and fight it incessantly until it disappears from the face of the earth. Until then, let us not be blinded by the glitter of surface wealth ; but let us study and solve the problem of how to get rid of dread poverty, the presence of which among us, in this enlightened twentieth century, is a national dishonor and an im- peachment of national intelligence! WEALTH IS NOT GOLD Contrary to popular opinion, gold does not play a prominent part among the items of national wealth ; in fact, it constitutes only a small fraction of the total wealth. As the measure of wealth, however, and as the universally adopted medium of exchange, — as Pur- chasing Power, — gold has no peer. Consequently, as such, it is desired by everybody to a degree that ap- proaches adoration. 34 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. Gold, thou visible god, Will make black, white; foul, fair; wrong, right; Base, noble; old, young; coward, valiant. — William Shakespeare. Thus, although comprising only a small portion of wealth, gold, in view of its acquired qualities, is of great importance in all social and commercial transac- tions, and is erroneously confused with wealth itself. An impression has been created that gold and wealth are identical, and that wealth, either of individuals or of a nation, consists of all kinds of money, with gold as its basis. This impression, however wrong, is so deeply rooted in the popular mind that real wealth, consist- ing of eminently useful as well as valuable commodi- ties, has been retired into the background, where it remains almost ignored. We are, of course, well pleased to know of the abun- dance of wheat, cotton, timber, etc., in our land; yet, somehow, the consciousness of the fact does not make us feel wealthy. On the other hand, when we read of a billion-dollar Congress carelessly appropri- ating another hundred millions for a new set of battle- ships, or of the Secretary of the Treasury signing a forty-million-dollar check as the purchase price for the costly Panama enterprise — then only are we conscious jf be ig rich. Goid, the representative of wealth, is taken for wealth itself, and the ease with which gold and money generally may be exchanged for anything that consti- THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 35 lEutes real wealth has produced the faulty yet lasting impression that money and wealth are synonymous. Thus a man possessing a million dollars or a corpora- tion worth a billion, appear before our mind's eye as owning that amount of ready cash, in gold, silver, greenbacks, etc. Although, upon reflection, we easily perceive our error, yet the delusion is so general, clings to us so tenaciously, that it permanently misleads many, and effectively obscures the whole field of dis- cussion upon the nature and distribution of national wealth. MILLIONAIRES OWN WEALTH, NOT CURRENCY Deluded by the word "dollars," the people entirely ignore the fact that the fortunes of millionaires and corporations consist not of dollars but of those useful and consequently valuable objects which are the com- posite parts of our national wealth. In the city of New York, for instance, there is a score of individuals who are credited with owning five hundred million dollars' worth of wealth. They certainly do not own that amount of gold or silver or any kind of currency. They own the substance far more valuable than gold or silver, viz., strictly limited land and buildings in the city of New York, the value of which increases constantly and automatically. While the value of gold remains almost stationary the value of the property of the said twenty New Yorkers is being multiplied a hundredfold, for real estate in 36 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. the city of New York is worth to-day a hundred times as much as it was worth thirty or forty years ago. Therefore, had the fortunes of these particular mil- lionaires consisted of gold, greenbacks, etc., we might remain indifferent. But, as they are well on the road toward ownership — Marcus Crassus' fashion, — of the "most part" of the chief seaport of this nation, it is time for us to pause and give the subject the atten- tion it deserves. "A score of individuals owning one- half of the city of New York" sounds very queerly in a democratic republic, and should attract more than a passing notice from intelligent American people. This is only one instance. In other directions — in fact, everywhere — similar conditions prevail: modern Croesuses and their creations, the trusts, have acquired absolute ownership, not of dollars but of the parts and parcels of our national wealth. Hence it is vitally important, in order to clearly understand the subject in hand, to constantly bear in mind that MONEY AND WEALTH ARE NOT THE SAME THING, and that American multimil- lionaires do not own gold, silver and other currency, but the profit-bringing parts of our national wealth, such as the highly profitable oilfields, coal and other mines, railroads, etc. NATIONAL WEALTH IS LIMITED There exists in the popular mind another and still graver delusion in regard to this nation's wealth. Owing to its magnitude, the wealth of this land ap- (THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 37 pears unlimited, and such it is supposed to be. Its great extent resembles the vast expanse of an ocean, while its countless composite parts, by their change- able nature and extreme flexibility, appear as renew- able and inexhaustible as the water in the ocean. It seems that no matter how much wealth may be taken out, there will still always remain so much that no perceptible impression can be made upon the whole volume of wealth. In short, it is taken for granted that the wealth of this nation is unlimited. This delusion works like a pall spread before the eyes of the people to obstruct their vision. Laboring under this misconception, they regard with serene indifference the advent and ceaseless augmentation of immense private fortunes. They are confident that the formation and growth of millionairism makes but little impression, if any, upon the limitless bulk of national wealth, and that no matter how much of it may be appropriated by individuals or corporations, society cannot be harmed by the fact. Such a rosy view of the resources and possibilities of our country is, unfortunately, based upon a wrong foundation, and consequently is erroneous and not sup- ported by facts. Uncle Sam, being a prudent business man, causes a decennial census-taking of his children and their chat- tels. The official enumerators usually have no diffi- culty in ascertaining the worldly possessions of the people and the exact total wealth of the United States. It has been found that on June i, 1910, the American 38 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, national wealth presented the exact figure of $107,- 104,211,917, not a dollar more or less. Had the wealth of our country been as unlimited as water in the ocean, — and as the people imagine it to be, — it surely could not have been so easily ascer- tained, enumerated and appraised. Everything that had any value was taken into consideration. All the real and personal property of the people; all public and private buildings, mines, forests, crops, livestock; in short, absolutely everything of value that was con- tained on June i, 1910, within the borders of the broad dominion of Uncle Sam. Obviously, there is a certain limit to it if the sum total can be so easily found. Our land has well-defined natural limits not to be transgressed. We have an ocean on each side, the Do- minion of Canada above, and Mexico below us. The efforts to expand in any direction would be met with opposition. We must be contented with the posses- sion of a limited landed property. As regards the particulars of that property, it is well known that our wealth in timber is fast diminish- ing, and that this gives uneasiness to the forestry experts, who recommend various measures for its con- servation and preservation. The same may be said of the naturally exhaustible coal lands, oil fields, and other resources of the land. Natural limitations of some parts of our wealth are beyond dispute. It is quite evident, for instance, that should all oil fields become the property of one family, the rest of the people will be (are?) obliged to pay that family any THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 39 price it may "fix," because there will be no more oil to be had anywhere else in this whole broad land. So far so good. Yet it may be stated that the natural limitation of our resources need not give us mucti uneasiness, because the resources of our land are, generally speaking, so great that they can supply plentifully a population many times exceeding the present one. The exhaustible forests, coal mines, etc., if properly managed, will last for many generations to come, and, when they are finally exhausted, the in- genuity of the American people can be relied on to invent some efficient substitutes. So there is no ap- parent reason for worry on this account. POSSIBILITIES ARE LIMITLESS Dame Nature appears to have been even more boun- tiful in other directions. Her generous gifts, such as crops, cotton, wool, livestock, etc., are not only innu- merable but can unquestionably be renewed and in- creased at will, and to a really unlimited extent. A superficial observer may exclaim : "Our national wealth is indeed boundless." It is not so. Our wealth is not boundless ; it is our possibilities to pro- duce and increase wealth that are limitless. We have the facilities, — immense natural resources and a highly industrious people, — to produce a truly immense and limitless wealth, and thereby banish from this land every case of unmerited poverty and privation. 40 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. Why don't we do it? Why is it that wealth actu- ally produced falls so far short of supplying with comfort and ease all the people, without a single ex« ception? Why is it that our wealth appears, in this respect, very much limited indeed, and that every now and then, to add insult to injury, an inane cry is raised of overproduction. Imagine overproduction in a country teaming with indigence ! What is it that causes production to stop short be- fore general comfort is reached? What is it that de- prives the majority of American people of an equitable participation in our immense American wealth? In order to find the correct answer to these most im- portant questions we must inquire into the nature and effects of that ancient law of supply and demand which is, as yet, only superficially understood. WEALTH IS LIMITED BY PURCHASING POWER OF THE PEOPLE A manufacturer does not make a million chairs when he knows that he can dispose of only one-tenth of that amount. A farmer would be unwise to raise a mil- lion pumpkins when his experience teaches him that he can sell only a much smaller quantity. Thus, wealth produced by a manufacturer, or a farmer, or by any other producer, must always be complied with the demand for it. It is strictly limited by such de- mand. Men do not work in factories or on farms for the fun of the thing. They do so for wages or profit, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 41 because the owner, or manager, knows that there is a demand for the goods produced by them. It seems plain that demand (which is closely allied with purchasing power) is that force which keeps the production of wealth in any nation within certain limits, beyond which it would be unprofitable to pro- duce more wealth. When the demand is large, wealth is increased, and vice-versa. A naturally unlimited expansion of wealth is always regulated and strictly limited by the demand for it. American wealth is no exception to the rule: what- ever the American people may demand, and are able to purchase, is produced, and no more. THEREIN LIES THE LIMIT OF AMERICAN WEALTH. It is most Imperative to bear in mind that this is the truth and nothing but the truth. Political economists know this very well. Yet they serenely dismiss the subject with the superficial statement: "As human wants and desires are unlimited, a demand for goods is also unlimited." Obviously short-sighted reasoning, for unfortunately the ''wants and desires" of the ma- jority of the American people are indeed unlimited, yet their real ''demand" for goods, — what they can pay for them, — is far from being unlimited ; in fact, it does not amount to much ! In order to become an economic force, demand must be supported by purchasing power, by money. With- out it, demand is only a potentiality, not a reality; a mere "desire," generally unsatisfied, until the means are procured for converting it into "demand." 42 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, This point is inexplicably overlooked by orthodox political economists. It is sometimes hinted at, but never thoroughly analyzed. PROSPERITY DEPENDS ON PURCHASING POWER OF THE PEOPLE In the animal kingdom, and among savages, physical force is sufficient for the effective backing of wants and desires, and therefore it takes the place of "pur- chasing power." It constitutes the real "demand" of beasts and savages. We, being civilized, may not use our physical prow- ess for such a purpose, for, if we do, we are liable to land in prison or in a lunatic asylum. We must sup- port our "demand" for any goods with a certain quan- tity of substantial purchasing power in the shape of gold, silver, greenbacks or other magic "open sesame" of modern times. We must have gold or other currency, otherwise our desires, and even wants and necessities, will re- main unsatisfied, and the "demand" will be non-exist- ent (except in the books on Political Economy). Economic demand is so closely allied to the pur- chasing power of a given community that it may safely be assumed that the GENERAL PROSPER- ITY OF A NATION IS EXPRESSED IN THE AGGREGATE PURCHASING POWER OF ITS PEOPLE. Nothing new, perhaps, yet so far but poorly understood. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 43 As regards the American nation, the aggregate pur- chasing power of its people cannot be very large, when we know from reliable official statistics that more than 90% of our people are living on the aver- age wages of $9 a week for a family of five! Such meager wages are barely sufficient to satisfy the wants and necessities of our population; they are utterly inadequate to satisfy any desires for comfort, recrea- tion, leisure, etc. Therefore, the desires of the ma- jority of the American people, lacking the means for their support, do not rise to the dignity of a "demand" and remain unsatisfied. Then the corresponding "pro- duction" of goods becomes limited, and even crippled, and the period of "hard times" sets in. The wealth of any nation is thus limited in its vol- ume. Anything that tends to increase the aggregate purchasing power of the majority of the people widens these limits and increases wealth; anything that has a tendency to decrease the people's purchasing power correspondingly decreases its wealth. When all the profits from the most important indus- tries of the country flow unrestrainedly to a few fami- lies, while the rest of the people are compelled to live exclusively on their meager "wages," is it not ridiculous to call such a condition "prosperity"? The United States at this time is exactly in such a con- dition. The national wealth is now sadly limited by the withdrawal from the purchasing power of the American people of almost the entire ,volume ol profits from their industries. ^4 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, Obviously, a rearrangement of the channels through which the profits from our industries flow is imper- ative. Elimination of millionairism by the enactment of a law limiting the private possessions of individuals say to $250,000, is a step in the right direction. It cannot accomplish the desired result all at once; but it is bound in the course of time to TURN TOWARD THE PEOPLE THE TIDE OF PROFITS FROM THE PEOPLE'S INDUSTRIES. By so doing it will add greatly to the aggregate purchasing power of the American people, will broaden the limits of pro- duction and wealth, will spread broadcast the comforts of life, and will make unmerited poverty a condition of the past, to be remembered with sadness and horror. WEALTH OF ROBINSON CRUSOE Before we leave this chapter let us take a look, by way of illustration, at our old friend, Robinson Cru- soe, on his lonely island. Crusoe needed no purchasing power. When he found a heap of gold he addressed it disrespectfully: "Oh, drug! What art thou good for? One of these knives is to me worth all this heap. ... I have no manner of use for thee." On the other hand, when, during his explorations of the island, he found many articles useful and valu- able to him, he wrote in his diary: "I found many cocoa trees, oranges and grapevines, and I was ex- ceeding glad of them. I contemplated with great pleasure the fruitfulness of the valley. ... I was the THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 45 lord of the whole manor. ... I had nothing to covet, for I had all I was now capable of enjoying. ... I might have raised a ship-loading of corn, but I had no use for it. So I let as little grow as I thought enough for my ocr- '-".,. I had timber enough to build me a fleet ot ships; and I had grapes enough to have made wine, or to have cured into raisins, and to have loaded that fleet when it had been built. But I had enough to eat and supply my wants, and what was all the rest to me? If I killed more flesh than I could eat, the dog must eat it or the vermin; if I sowed more corn than I could use, it must be spoiled. In a word, the nature and experience of things dic- tated to me that all the good things of this world are no further good to us, than they are for our use." There is much wisdom in this homely reasoning of our friend Crusoe. His wealth was apparently un- limited, yet a census-taking would have revealed the fact that all his available wealth consisted only of a cave or two, a flock of goats, some clothes, tools and a stock of provisions — a quantity of articles strictly limited by the demand for them. His wants and de- sires having been satisfied, all other things to be found on the island were "of no manner of use" for him, for he had "enough for his occasion." OBJECT LESSON FROM CRUSOE'S ISLAND The situation and philosophy of Robinson Crusoe are instructive as well as interesting. First of all we notice that he had "no manner of 46 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. use" for gold. A corroboration of the statement made at the commencement of this chapter, that gold is not wealth but only an expedient measure of the same and a medium of exchange. As both of these attri- butes of gold were of no value for a lone man, he rightly pronounced it a useless "drug." Furthermore, Crusoe had the facilities and plenty of time to produce hundreds of times as much as he actually produced. But he voluntarily limited his wealth production, adapting it to his wants. Thus, by his own volition, his apparently unlimited wealth was made strictly limited to the extent of supplying his wants and desires. Such a phenomenon is observable everywhere, be it on the desert island of Robinson Crusoe or in the well-populated and highly civilized United States. The extent of the wealth of any nation is invariably proportionate to the welfare of its population. The higher the welfare, the larger the wealth; and vice- versa. The welfare of Robinson Crusoe was, upon his own testimony, very high. He had nothing to covet, having all he was capable of enjoying. He did not care to increase his wealth-production, because all his wants and desires were fully satisfied. How do millions of American citizens compare with Robinson Crusoe? Have they also nothing to covet? Have they all they are capable of enjoying? Have they "killed more flesh than they could eat . . . sowed more corn than they could use"? Are they all THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 47. well housed, comfortably clad, nourishingly fed, and, in short, are all their wants and desires fully satis-^ fied? Alas, all these questions must be answered in the negative. Many Americans are infinitely worse off than Crusoe ever was on his miserable island. Al- though their natural resources are unquestionably great, their energy for work and inventive genius ex- ceptional, and their intelligence certainly superior to that of a poor shipwrecked sailor — yet the majority of them are barely satisfying their necessities, while their desires for comfort, recreation, leisure, pursuit of arts, etc., remain mostly unsatisfied. For this unenviable condition they have no one to blame but themselves because they have unwisely granted to a few individuals the unnatural and ex- tremely harmful privilege of APPROPRIATING UNLIMITED PORTIONS OF THE LIMITED .WEALTH OF THE AMERICAN NATION. ^8 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. CHAPTER III Unlimited Unearned Profits — Unlimited Evil EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION— BASIS OF PROSPERITY "The corporations of the future will serve the public as semi-public servants, with own- ership widespread among the public. In broadly distributed ownership among the pub- lic and labor the profits are distributed among the people." — Geo. W. Perkins, in an interview in the "New York World." It is the prevalent opinion, upheld by many scien- tists, tnat only three things are necessary for creating wealth and rendering the people prosperous : plenty of productive work, men to do it, and means to do it with. While it is true that the presence of all these three factors is needed for making wealth, a fourth factor is required to bring that wealth within the reach of the entire population,— EQUITABLE DIS- TRIBUTION OF WEALTH. A condition without which "prosperity" is a delusion and a snare. We need not look abroad for the proof of the truth- fulness of the above assertion. Our own country proves it beyond doubt. We have an abundance of productive work to be done; an industrial army of able men to do it; and great natural resources and I THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 49 facilities to do it with. Yet copious evidence demon- strates that we are, as a nation, prosperous only on the surface, — or rather on the top. Such skin-deep prosperity is explainable by the absence of that fourth important factor, — the equitable distribution of wealth. We have indeed in our midst a few fabulously wealthy families, while the bulk of our population consists of families either homeless or owning property not worth mentioning : according to the figures of the latest cen- sus, the majority of our people own only property represented by their fire insurance policies, — a pitiful average of $250 worth of household furniture. If such a condition can be dignified by name "prosper- ity," then what is "poverty"? It is apparent that the making of wealth is not all- sufficient. Political economists, who emphasize the good that results from investment by millionaires of their great fortunes into business, obviously are attach- ing undue importance to the production of wealth, at the same time slighting the equally important, — if not more important, — distribution of goods produced. For of what use is it to produce immense stacks of goods only to burden the shelves of the retailing tradesmen? The people cannot afford to purchase them, having but meager resources at their command. And the lat- ter will never increase, unless the distribution of wealth becomes more equitable than it is at the pres- ent time. ISO KINGS OF WEALTH VS. TWO CHANNELS OF DISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH The wealth of the American people, while in the process of economic distribution, flows incessantly through two main channels : Wages and Profits. There are many subdivisions of these chief ways ; but, to simplify the discussion of the subject, all the sources of income may satisfactorily be designated by these two general names. In order to satisfy our needs and desires we must draw from one or the other of these channels. The life-giving fluid that flows through them is, like the precious water in the desert wells, indispensable for our very existence. There is positively no other way of making a living. We must either offer our ser- vices in an open market, and receive for them wages (salaries, fees, commissions, etc.), or, if we happen to own any capital, we may let other people have the use of it for a consideration of profits (interest, divi- dends, rent, etc.). It is indisputable that the majority of the American people are relying exclusively on wages for their liv- ing; "profits" are known to them by name only. From the President of the Union, at $75,000 per annum, all through the various stages of wage-earning down to an office-boy at $3 per week, the people draw from one channel only, the wages. Such is the lot of 999 men out of every 1,000 Americans. iThe lucky "thousandth" men, though naturally very THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 51 few in number, have the immense channel of profits all to themselves: they draw from it to their hearts' content and to the exclusion of the rest of the people. This fact is strangely overlooked by the orthodox political economists. Therefore, the problem before us is narrowed to this : how can a distribution of the national wealth be so regulated as to enable the remaining 999 men to also participate in profits in addition to their wages? Such participation is not only desirable, but impera- tive-; without it an equitable distribution is an impos- sibility, unless we accept the Socialistic dictum that profits should be abolished altogether. Unless such a participation takes place, the entire economic structure of the United States will soon pre- sent (some say it is presenting) a picture of the Ro- man Republic at the time of its decadence: a few immensely rich Kings of Wealth and the majority of the people everlastingly struggling with dread pov- erty. Indeed, no amount of political liberty can do the American people any good as long as their eco- nomic condition is wrong at its very foundation. It effectually prohibits the people from the enjoyment of their political freedom. But can such a participation of the "greatest num- ber" of the people in the profits from their industries be effected? It certainly can. The purpose of subse- quent pages is to show that the enactment of the pro- posed Law of Limited Ownership is the right way of procedure. It can accomplish the desired result in 52 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. Sin honest, straightforward way, without recourse to any subterfuges and makeshifts. It will make the equitable distribution of American wealth a fact. Before proceeding further, however, it is necessary to inquire into the nature of "profits." PROFITABLE FACTORY OF MASTER GWYNNE Let us imagine a young gentleman, Alfred Gwynne, who has inherited from his father a well-appointed lace factory worth $100,000. This "business property" yields him a net "profit" of $6,000 per annum. A visit to his factory would reveal to the gaze of a visitor a large hall filled with quaint-looking and high- ly complicated machinery. Accompanied by the hum- ming sound of rapidly revolving wheels and belts, nu- merous finger-like attachments to the machinery are bewilderingly dancing, now up and down, now side- ways, but always catching at some golden silk or other delicate thread, and producing lacework of ex- quisite designs. To a casual observer this would ap- pear like an enchanted world. The human-like intel- ligence, combined with perfect accuracy and precision of these ingenious machines, will, no doubt, fill him with admiration. It is Master Gwynne's capital. Everyone of these costly machines is faithfully working for him, their "owner," and coining for him his profits of $500 per month. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 53 But, as a matter of fact, the machines are not work- ing unaided. Were there no living labor, whose per- sonal services are operating them, these machines, in- genious though they be, would have been worth only as much as a junkyard would have allowed for them as scrap iron. The presence of "living" labor always transforms inanimate worthlessness into high value. So in this factory there are also in evidence diverse human working machines, not exactly "owned," but "employed" by Master Gwynne. A visitor would ob- serve some unnaturally quiet and solemn-looking little girls, patiently replenishing feed boxes with the new stock of thread ; several hard-faced and begrimed men, tending to the necessary lubrication of the machines ; and in the office the apparently hump-backed young men, bending over their "books," and the automatic girl typewriters pounding incessantly on their key- boards. These are the receivers of "wages." Master Gwynne, the happy owner of the inanimate machinery, and employer (semi-owner) of the ani- mated machines, need not trouble himself about any- thing: his manager will hire his employees; will dis- charge or lay them off, when necessary; will pur- chase new stock and sell the produced goods ; in short, will superintend the entire work in the factory and attend to all the details of the management. The only thing which Master Gwynne has of necessity to do is— TO DRAW CHECKS AND ENJOY LIFE, keeping within the comfortable limits of his obvi- ously unearned profits of $17 per day. 54 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. Master Gwynne, without rendering any services whatever, is at liberty to pursue the easy and indo- lent life of a human butterfly, that flutters from flower to flower, feasting upon the sweets of life, with- out in the least earning them. His "machines" are doing for him yeoman's service, enabling him to pass through life as if it were a continuous holiday! EXPLOITATION OF TWO SETS OF WORKERS With the proceeds from his business property Mas- ter Gwynne is in a position to command the annual labor of another set of about fifty of his country- men, who will zealously work for his benefit. In ex- change for the "purchasing value" of his income he will find, daily, waiting for him, respectful servants, excellent meals, fashionable clothing, an auto for a drive, clubrooms for an afternoon lounge, a box in a theater for the evening, and on every side the pleas- ant smiles of all who may come within the touch of his magic wand of gold. No physical or mental exertion will be required of him : all the foregoing good things will be his, as long as he desires them, in exchange for the value of his snug income of $6,000 per annum. On the other hand, we have seen that the magic dollars of his "profits," just before they reached his pocketbook, were actually "earned" by the combined labor of his machinery and his employees; he cer- iTHE AMERICAN PEOPLE 55 tainly did not earn them; his factory employees did that for him. Thus it is plain that Master Gwynne is enjoying the SPECIAL PRIVILEGE of every capitalist to exploit two sets of workers: those who by actual labor in his factory have earned for him his annual profits of $6,000, and those elsewhere who also by actual toil are supplying him with all he wishes to have, TAK- ING FROM HIM IN EXCHANGE THE VERY DOLLARS EARNED FOR HIM BY THE FIRST SET OF WORKERS. To be a capitalist, even in a small way, is indeed a special privilege! Such is invariably the process of the so-called "liv- ing on profits" (were it dividends, rent, interest or any other form of income on capital). The dollars that make up such an income must be earned by some one's labor before they reach the capitalist. They do not drop from the skies, neither are they gathered on bushes by the roadside; someone's actual labor must earn them before they find their way to the fortunate go-between, the profit-gatherer. The owner of capital may remain idle as long as he pleases, while two distinct sets of workers will inces- santly labor for his benefit. It is his ''special privi- lege" to give to his country absolutely nothing for all the good things he receives. Applying the same reasoning and analysis to the phenomena of the industrial world of the present day, we can readily perceive that THOUSANDS UPON 56 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS ARE CEASE- LESSLY TOILING FOR THE BENEFIT OF EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THE INDUS- TRIAL UNLIMITED OWNERS. This statement is made without any malice, bitterness or envy; it is merely a truthful and impartial analysis of the un- natural conditions existing LEGALLY in modern so- ciety, with the people's consent, but hardly with their clear understanding. The fortunate owners of the explained special privi- lege may, if they choose (and many of them unques- tionably do so), remain indefinitely in luxurious idle- ness, giving personally to their country nothing ex- cept their ornamental selves, which, unfortunately, are often worse than nothing. In this connection the fol- lowing specimens of glittering worthlessness may be duly remembered: a millionaire youth of carnation fame; a millionaire man-slayer; a self-expatriated American multimillionaire, and many others of the same nature. SHOULD PROFITS BE ABOLISHED? We have taken a passing glance at the personnel of the factory employees of Master Gwynne. They be- long to the well-known type of "tenement-dwelling" wage-workers. They lead an unenviable existence on the average wages of $9 per week, and their work-day consists of from 10 to 12 hours of uninteresting and monotonous toil. These unfortunate semi-slaves of THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 57 the unnatural system of modern society are toiling week after week, and month after month, and receiv- ing their market-regulated "existence wages," while the entire profits from the business go to Master Gwynne, and provide him with the means to enjoy life. Master Gwynne may be an exquisite young man, of excellent manners and irreproachable habits; — yet it must be admitted that the fact of his enjoyment of the luxuries and pleasures of life at the expense of those pitiful tenement dwellers, — and of that other group of no less hard-working men, — is unjust and un- natural, to say the least. An income from capital, — were it interest, dividend, rent, or any other form of profit, — is always of the same nature: it brings to its owner the unearned, by him, fruits of the labor of his fellow-men, and also enables him to command both the present and the future labor of still another group of men. In fact, IT GIVES HIM A MORTGAGE ON THE LABOR OF FUTURE GENERATIONS YET UNBORN. Is it not an awful privilege? Is it right that human beings should remain on the level of beasts of bur- den, and labor for someone else to reap the benefit from their toil, while they themselves are allowed only enough "fodder" to keep them in good working con- dition? Is it right for one man to say to many men, in the words of Abraham Lincoln: "You toil and work and earn bread, and I'll eat it"? Is it right that any good-for-nothing idler should be permitted, — nay, 58 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. encouraged, — to remain in luxurious idleness? If it is wrong, what is to be done? Should the income on private capital, — profits, — be abolished, as the Social- ists advise us? PROFITS ON LIMITED PRIVATE PROPERTY ARE JUSTIFIABLE Over 300 years ago a law was enacted in ^England which announced that "Any interest on capital, being forbidden by the law of God, is a sin and detestable." Furthermore, the law imposed ''A forfeiture of the principal upon those who had taken an interest of 10% or less, and upon those who had taken more than 10% a forfeiture of treble the principal, imprisonment and fine, and a ransom, at the king's pleasure." Wise men of olden times evidently considered it as ungodly to countenance a ''premium on idleness." The father of Socialism, Karl Marx, said many years ago in his famous treatise, ''Capital": "Capital is a dead labor, which vampire-like becomes animated by sucking the life-blood of a living labor; and the more it consumes the better it thrives." At first sight, it appears almost inexplicable how, in spite of such relentless prosecutions on the part of the law and vehement denunciations on the part of science, the income on capital, in the shape of interest and other forms of "profit," not only survived, but is regarded as an essential part of the so-called "vested and sacred" rights of property, which may not be assailed lightly! iTHE AMERICAN PEOPLE Jg The natural inference is that there must be a weighty reason for such tenacious vitality of a prin- ciple once vigorously denounced, and now religiously upheld. The explanation is simple. Property and profit are near relations: the one is the parent of the other. By denying property we would have to deny its offspring, profits; and vice-versa. On the other hand, by accepting the right of private property, we must also accept the right to derive profits therefrom. To deny the owner the right to derive profit from his property would be as senseless as to deny the farmer the right to milk his cow or to gather apples from his apple trees. There is still another reason why an income on capital has been universally accepted. It rests upon the assumption that an accumulation of capital, at least in the beginning, is the result of frugality, of saving, and the product of one's own labor. As such it is entitled to a reward, which the owner may re- ceive in the shape of an "income." Either of the reasons mentioned is sufficient for a complete justification of an income on capital. The people, having instinctively realized this, have sanc- tioned such an income with the seal of their approval, in spite of the vigorous efforts of both law and sci- ence to drive it out of existence. Unfortunately, the people have failed to recognize that in this, as in everything else in this world, there should be a LIMIT, which may not be transgressed with impunity. Because, like his parent property, in- 6o KINGS OF WEALTH VS. come on capital is, within certain limits, a blessing, and, beyond them, a withering blight. LIMITED INHERITANCE IS ALSO JUSTIFIABLE Let us imagine that Masr. ^vvynne's father, an industrious business man, had succeeded in accumulat- ing a small fortune of $100,000, after many years of arduous labor and self-denial. Then he became old and unable to work any longer. Was he not entitled to retire from business, to rest, and reap the reward for his past labor by drawing an income on his well- earned capital? The answer is plain : he certainly was entitled to such a reward. Society could not possibly deny an aged workman the privilege of investing his savings in any way he might have chosen, and to de- rive profits from them. In the course of time our friend, the aged workman, died, leaving his hard-earned $100,000 to his only son, Alfred Gwynne. Alfred, being a prudent youth, in- vested his inheritance into the above described lace factory, and, having performed this solitary act of business, he also retired from business, resting on his father's laurels, and reaping, to this day, a reward for his father's "dead labor" by exploiting two sets of "living labor" to the extent of $6,000 per annum. Now we find ourselves in a dilemma which is quite perplexing. We have remarked, in the case of Master .Gwynne, that his butterfly existence at the expense of THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 61 the labor of two groups of hard-working men is unjust, to say the least. On the other hand, we have been compelled to admit, in the case of his father, that an aged workman has an unquestionable right to enjoy the proceeds of his life-long toil. Should we then deny the aged workman the privilege of bequeathing his savings to his son? Or should we deny Master Gwynne the privilege to inherit and enjoy the pro- ceeds of his father's labor? Neither course may be pursued with any degree of reason. The father, no doubt, had toiled and saved with the view of providing for the future welfare of his son. Any animal, bird or insect, led only by instinct, provides for its young. Surely man, the peer of creation, may not be denied the same privilege. Hence a child also may not be denied the right to enjoy and profit by the proceeds of his father's labor and forethought. Such a right is a sequence to his father's privilege : by denying either we would have to deny both. Therefore, upholding the right of private property, we must concede to the owners of said property the privilege of drawing a reasonable income from it, either for themselves or in the person of their heirs. In the latter case we have to reluctantly accept the inevitable evil of the existence of human parasites, un- worthy heirs to the accumulations of "dead labor," mercilessly exploiting ''living labor"; the too-often worthless sons of worthy fathers. 62 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. NECESSARY EVIL NEED NOT BECOME UNLIMITED EVIL Having been compelled to admit an evil, we are under no obligation to legalize unlimited evil. We may permit Alfred Gwynne and his kind the undisturbed ownership of private property worth, say, $250,000, more or less, from which they may derive and enjoy a REASONABLE AMOUNT OF UN- EARNED PROFITS. But let there be some LIMIT. Man's right to the enjoyment of a comfortable income, whether from saved or inherited capital, cannot be denied; neither can be disputed the privilege to suit- ably provide for one's children. But to go beyond a certain reasonable limit, and to legalize unlimited un- earned profits, is a grave injustice to those faithful workers who everlastingly toil for the benefit of a capitalist. It is true that, when we recognized the property- right of a farmer to his apple orchard, we agreed that it would be senseless to deny him the privilege of gathering apples from his apple trees. Yet would it not be still more injudicious to allow a particularly clever farmer to acquire the right of property to all the apple orchards in the land, and to grant him the exclusive privilege of gathering and selling for profit all the apples to be had in the United States? Is it not exactly the same Special Privilege which was un- wisely granted by us to various individuals in regard THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 63 to our public utilities, such as oil, coal, sugar, to- bacco, etc.? AMERICAN BACCHANALIA OF PROFIT- GATHERING Nowhere on earth can be observed such enormous^ profit gathering by business millionaires and their families and heirs as in the United States. Countless millions of dollars, earned, as was explained, by hosts of American wage-workers, are gathered up and most- ly reinvested by said millionaires to gather new profits, while a considerable part is lavishly squandered on such unprofitable and unworthy enterprises as the re- building of castles for debilitated European nobility, furnishing the said nobility with the means for lead- ing a life of idle dissipation, etc. There are scores of American women, daughters of millionaires, who have traded hard-earned American dollars for silly titles and a life of apparent glitter, and, too often, of real misery. A great many of these woebegone duchesses, countesses, and other "ladies," are at present either divorced or simply "separated" from their original husbands, some of them having pur- chased the second edition of a titled lord. One of the most prominent among the title-hunting heiresses of New York is reputed to be the richest young woman in the world, having inherited a for- tune of $25,000,000. Another duchess from America is rich enough to have purchased a "quiet" separation 64 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, from her duke, by assigning to his lordship an an- nuity of $100,000, to be paid to him in good American dollars every year, as long as he graces this world with his ornamental presence. In other words, by this action of "her highness" her ex-lord will be the lawful recipient, for many years to come, of the proceeds of the annual labor of at least one thousand American workers, who will labor exclusively for him, in ex- actly the same way as their brethren were shown to toil for the benefit of the owner of the lace factory, and as the numberless other American wage-workers are toiling for the benefit of a British Astor, of a homi- cidal lunatic Harry Thav/, and of many other human drones. An absentee King of Wealth, who contemptuously spurned American citizenship in order to become a "subject" to British Majesty, is, thanks to that time- worn iniquity, the right to unlimited private property, gathering a ceaseless stream of unearned profits from his immense business properties in the city of New York (mostly high-priced hotels, apartment houses, etc.). It is conservatively estimated that he receives annually twelve million dollars,— ONE MILLION A MONTH, — in absolutely unearned profits (Would it not be laughable to call them earned?) and expends them munificently in entertaining British royalty and its glittering satellites. Meanwhile in America these profits, before they are shipped across the ocean, are earned by the actual toil of at least 50,000 American wage-workers. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 65 Another glaring specimen of an idle millionaire-by- inheritance, supported by the labor of many thou- sands of Americans, is a young man who has inherited from his father the snug fortune of $100,000,000, mostly in profitable Central Railroad bonds and stocks. His annual income (obviously unearned by him) amounts to many millions of dollars, and enables him to in- dulge in the pastimes of costly coaching exercises, ex- pensive love-affairs, and other similarly questionable activities. The evil admitted by us in the case of the young owner of that imaginary lace factory, in this case is multiplied many thousands of times, be- coming a truly UNLIMITED EVIL. PROFITS OF A CAPITALIST ARE ALWAYS UNEARNED To say that the profits of a capitalist are always un- earned does not sound as a statement embodying truth ; yet such is the case, as we shall presently see. In Master Gwynne, the British Astor, and the title- hunting heiresses, we have exposed for observation the male and female idlers who are enjoying the special privilege of drawing obviously unearned profits. The injustice to actual workmen, who earn these profits and support the idlers by their labor, was rendered thus more palpable and emphatic. But, as a matter of fact, the personality of a capitalist does not alter the nature of any income on capital, which is AL- WAYS UNEARNED, or rather earned by the labor of someone else. 66 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. We may imagine Master Gwynne as an industrious and talented young man, assuming the duties of his factory manager and becoming an active head of the concern. In such a case he would earn his manager's salary in addition to his unearned profits, so that, if such a salary were $2,000, his total income would rise to $8,000 ($6,000 plus $2,000), the unearned profits remaining the same. It seems plain that a capitalist can never earn his profits. He may, however, increase them, and, if such increase should be due to his talents and industry, his salary should also be increased, as an adequate com- pensation for his able management. But the profits from his business he does not earn: they are earned for him by the combination of his capital (dead labor) and his employees (living labor). Therefore, were the capitalist the most gifted, en- terprising and persevering person, his privilege to ap- propriate for himself all the profits earned by the ma- chinery and by actual laborers may be conceded only as an expedient and within certain limits, but not other- wise. The fact that modern captains of industry are not as worthless as Master Gwynne, and that many of them aT-e highly talented and deserving, does not jus- tify their wholesale appropriation of the fruits of the labor of others. The Father of Trusts, for instance, was certainly entitled to, and fully earned, a large re- muneration for having devoted his unquestionable genius to the development of the oil industry of this THE AMERICAN PEOPLE (ij country. But no stretch of the imagination and no amount of sophistry can reconcile one to the idea that he is now earning the enormous profits, amounting to $50,000,000 (A MILLION A WEEK), derived from innumerable industries in which his immense accumu- lations have been invested, reinvested, and again rein- vested. It should also be remembered that this stu- pendous income of "a million a week" does not drop from the skies, but is actually earned for him by his inanimate oil pipes, mines, mills, shipping, etc., and by the daily toil of an army of over 100,000 employees, whose average share is the usual "existence" wages of $9 a week. Indeed, it is an "evil on a large scale" ! Unfortunately, this particular billionaire is not the only one in the business of exploiting by the whole- sale. The fathers of the afore-mentioned title-hunting heiresses are doing the same. They are busily engaged in piling profits on profits, millions on millions, by all means within their reach, whether fair or foul ; by liberal watering of their stocks; by gentlemen's (?) agreements ; by cheating the Government of taxes ; by getting indicted one day and whitewashed the next; in short, by fleecing American lambs vigorously and incessantly. These opulent gentlemen, veritable Kings of Wealth, scarcely 5,000 in number, have thus far amassed an enormous "private wealth," which in its volume equals the total combined wealth of twenty-six States of the Union, counting public and private land, buildings, mines, forests, everything. They have rendered the 68 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. equitable distribution of American wealth an object for ridicule. Meanwhile, the people, being unable to trace the present deplorable condition to its primary cause, are wondering why is it that, in spite of the presence of all the requisites necessary for creating prosperity, the unemployment and poverty are chronic among them ; the army of tramps on the increase ; and in the cities many thousands are officially reported as slowly starving from "under-nourishment" ! [WORKERS ARE EXCLUDED FROM PARTICI- PATION IN PROFITS We have seen that in America only one person in a thousand is enjoying the privilege of living on the profits from his capital ; while the remaining 999 citi- zens are dependent on their wages for a livelihood. The only hope for the latter to ever emerge from a state of continuous need and dependence lies in the possibility of their acquiring a share in that other huge channel of wealth. Profits. Such a possibility is not recognized by Socialistic doctrine, which flatly de- clares that all private profits should be abolished. But as long as profits from private business proper- ties are "a. condition, not a theory," the people should strive to get a just and equitable share in this part of their national wealth. In vain, though, would they cast their wistful eyes over the entire field of profitable industries; they will find everywhere industries ap- propriated, and in most cases monopolized outright, by iTHE AMERICAN PEOPLE 69 the select few, to whom all the profits flow unrestrain- edly and in a ceaseless stream. Nothing is left for them but their existence-level wages to thrive upon. A hopeless and a cheerless prospect for many in this land of apparent plenty ! The absence of any limit to private holdings gives to any capitalist a legal right to expend a large amount of his "profits" derived from American industries, and still reach for more and more. Meanwhile, the ma- jority of American people are thus driven further and further into a condition of poverty and dependence. We have seen that the immense channels of Wages and Profits are approximately of equal volume. Yet more than 90% of our population are completely ex- cluded from any participation in the channel of Profits ; they are denied any share in the enormous amount of business "profits" WHICH THEY ACTUALLY EARN, BUT RECEIVE NOT. Is it any wonder that they look to Socialism for relief? Why should they, though, when it is within their power to enact a simple and just Law of Limited Ownership, and thereby open for millions of Americans an equal opportunity of sharing in the common industrial' wealth of this na- tion? LET EVERYONE GET WHAT HE DESERVES The policy of society should be to treat all equitably, rich or poor alike, doing injury to no one. The aim should be to let all get what he deserves, whether a 70 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, man be a genius like Thomas Edison, a hero like George Dewey, or a colossus of the industrial world like John D. Rockefeller ; or last, — but not the least, — > an everyday humble worker, without either genius or any particular ability. Let all get what they are worth to society, what they earn and deserve. And let no one suffer ; let the weak be protected from the encroachments of the strong; let no one be abandoned to starve in this land of plenty. At the present time the reward given is out of pro- portion to the services rendered, or even to the merits of the recipient. Mr. Edison is said to have been well rewarded by society, but it is safe to assume that his fortune is as nothing in comparison with the dazzling business properties of many idle millionaires- by-inheritance. Admiral Dewey is receiving from his grateful countrymen the modest salary of $13,000 per annum. At the same time Mr. Rockefeller is granted the monstrous privilege of drawing upon them an- nually for over $50,000,000 of "unearned profits." Thus, judging by the size of the reward, Mr. Rocke- feller is more valuable to this land than one thousand geniuses like Thomas Edison, or five thousand heroes like George Dewey. Truly, the reward is incompati- ble with merit. As regards the forgotten and neglected humble wage-worker, — who, by the bye, comprises no less than 99% of the population, — he receives for his everlasting toil a pittance of $9 a week for a family of five, and THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 7^ is paternally reminded that he must be thankful for receiving as much, because his fellow workers in Eu- rope are receiving even less than he does. MISERY MUST BE CONSOLED BY THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE CO-EXISTENCE OF DEEPER MISERY. Such an obviously unjust and deplorable condition of our country must not be allowed to continue: the majority of the population must not be suffered to merely exist on semi-starvation wages, while a few in- dividuals are granted a Special Privilege to "grab-as- you-please" and to luxuriate on "unearned profits." The people may concede, as an expedient, to any capitalist, whether active or idle, the privilege to ac- quire, own and profit by a reasonable amount of pri- vate property; but under no circumstances should such property remain unreasonably unlimited; for in such a case the equitable distribution of American wealth will forever remain an unattainable myth. Nothing but a direct limitation by law of private ownership of wealth will ever throw open to the people the participation in that immense channel, Profits, which comprises one-half of the wealth of this nation and is at the present time in complete possession of the few Kings of Wealth. ^2 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, CHAPTER IV Private Monopoly — Foe to Civilization ENIGMA OF PROGRESS AND POVERTY To the nineteenth century belongs the credit for the invention and application of innumerable labor-saving machines and devices. A magnificent industrial de- velopment was the natural result of these achieve- ments. Yet the venerable Alfred Russell Wallace re- marks, with excellent reason : "It is the crowning dis- grace of the nineteenth century that, with a hundred- fold increase in our power of wealth production, — ade- quate to abundantly supply every rational want of our entire population, — the workers are, on the average, as deeply sunk in poverty and misery as before." This is the grave enigma of "Progress and Poverty," as yet unsolved. To the people generally, and to the American people in particular, belongs the credit for exercising their inventive genius in the right way, and also the dis- credit for displaying but a limited sagacity when they permitted the incalculable benefits and profits, result- ing from great inventions, to flow unrestrainedly in the wrong direction : not to the people, as they should have ; but away from the people, and to a few specially privileged individuals, who have thus easily monopo- lized all the important industries of the land. The task of the twentieth century is plain. It must ,THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 73 rectify the grievous error of its predecessor: it must reclaim for the people the benefits which by right be- long to them, and which are the natural result of the onward march of human progress. As the distribution of wealth is that fateful rock upon which the nations of the world have invariably been wrecked, it is imperative to examine it thor- oughly, and the first step should be — to ascertain whether commodities can be produced in very large and constantly increasing quantities, and, if so, then whether they can be so directed as to find their way to the largest possible number of persons, and eventu- ally to the entire population of any country? MARVELS OF MODERN PRODUCTION The mission of industrial inventions is to make production easier and the things produced plentiful and accessible to the people at large. The first of these aims has been attained to perfection : the things we need are produced with almost incredible ease. For instance, a shoemaker requires one hour to sew soles by hand ; with the help of a McKay sewing machine he can do it in one minute, sewing in a single operation through the outsole, insole and up- per. This part of shoemaking has thus been rendered sixty times easier than it was heretofore. Are our shoes sixty times cheaper? Adam Smith was lost in admiration at the progress in the pin-making industry of his time, when one 74 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. workman could make five thousand pins a day. At the present time one workman, attending twelve auto- matic machines, turns out a million pins a day. The art of pin-making has been made two hundred times more effective. Our grandmothers' knitting needles were working overtime producing one pair of stockings a week. To-day one person's labor of eight minutes on a knit- ting machine completes a pair. This is two hundred and fifty times as fast as with the knitting needles wielded by hand. Are our stockings 250 times cheaper than they were before? Leather used to be tanned by being first soaked in a weak solution of hemlock for a week; then in pits of a stronger solution for six weeks ; then in "lay- aways" for another six weeks ; and so on, until it took, in all, six months to make good leather. To-day, with the help of chemicals, even the thickest hide can be tanned in three hours! A wonderful progress! The leather tanning is four hundred times easier than it was before. Surely the leather we purchase now is not 400 times cheaper than it was before. A yard of the finest Brussels or velvet carpet comes out of the power loom every ten minutes! With the help of modern machinery, nine minutes* work of one man produces a bushel of wheat, from plowing to harvest ! It would be tedious to recount all the marvels of modern production. The few instances quoted are sufficient for our purpose of demonstrating the great THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 75 facility and immense reduction in the cost of modern production. All commodities affected, — and what are not affected? — are being produced at least one hun- dred times easier than half a century ago, and, natu- rally, their cost of production is correspondingly smaller. PRODUCTION CHEAPER— PRICES ARTI- FICIALLY HIGHER Commodities so easily produced should be as plenti- ful as the leaves on trees, or the sand on the beach, or even air itself; for they can be produced in limitless quantities and at a trifling cost. Is it not natural to suppose that they should be accessible to everybody and sold at prices so low that even the humblest would be able to acquire and enjoy them? Such should be the natural result of the progress in the methods of production. It is incredible, yet true, that actually the reverse condition is observable all around us. Those very commodities which are so easily and cheaply produced are very expensive and practically scarce; the major* ity of the people are in constant need of them, while a great many, owing to almost prohibitive prices, are compelled to get along without them. Instead of the gradual cheapening of the goods, thanks to the advance of civilization and centraliza- tion of industries; instead of the comforts and even luxuries becoming the common property of all the 76 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. people — the comforts and pleasures of life are growing inaccessible for the majority of the people, who have to deny themselves even proper nourishment and clothing, owing to the prevalent high prices. Millions of Americans are no better off than was Tantalus, who, with an abundance of food and water around him, was slowly perishing from hunger and thirst! In the recent Report of the Department of Com- merce and Labor, where the prices of 257 commodi- ties were taken into consideration, the present cost of living has been found to be the highest ever known in the history of this country. It is still rising, and to-day it is sixty-five per cent, higher than it was seventeen years ago. How can such contradictory phenomena be recon- ciled? A great reduction in the cost of production and the equally great increase in the prices of things produced? A grave riddle, indeed. It must have a better solution than the puerile prattle about the abun- dance of gold production, the extravagance of the people (on $9 a week!), etc. It would be absurd to assume that the goods have naturally advanced in price in spite of the marvellous decrease in the cost of their production. And, as the progress is observed in every branch of production, — from raising an ear of corn to building a battleship, — the present high prices cannot be explained by natural causes: they have been brought about ARTIFI- CIALLY! THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ^y The factor that is instrumental in such an artificial raising of the prices of commodities ; that is guilty of the perversion of the natural order of things ; that has deprived the majority of the American people of their indisputable right to participate in the benefits derived from the progress in labor-saving machinery — is in- deed inimical to the welfare of the people. A REACTIONARY FORCE STOPS PROGRESS OF CIVILIZATION Naturally, progress in the methods of production must result in a cheapening of the prices of every- thing, and in the consequent spreading of more and more comfort among the mass of the people. The mission of progress can be nothing else. Its aim should be to bring the full enjoyment of life to an ever larger and larger number of men until it reaches at last all the people, without a single exception. Such must be the mission of civilization and progress; otherwise our boasted civilization is a fraud and a mockery ! But it is in the power of a certain reactionary force to sidetrack the onward march of progress so as to make it drift from the many to the few. Obviously it has done so in the United States of America; it has effectually and almost completely diverted from the majority of the American people the immense benefits and profits resulting from the invention of innumerable labor-saving devices. 78 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. To so deprive many millions of persons of the fruits of civilization, of a comfortable life and freedom from care to which civilization unquestionably entitles them, and to plunge them, instead, into an abyss of continuous struggle with poverty and misery, is cer- tainly a grave trespass upon the rights and well-being of the people. We shall see who is THE TRESPASSER. AMERICANS ARE PAYING MILLIONS IN TRIBUTE When the arrogant Directory of France refused to receive American ambassadors unless the United States promised to pay a tribute of a quarter of a million of dollars, the leader of the would-be ambas- sadors, Charles Co Pinkney, gave this memorable re- ply: "Millions for defense, but not a cent for tribute." The rejected ambassadors left France, and the haughty Directory had ample leisure for pondering over the spirited rejoinder of the freedom-loving citizens. This happened a little over a hundred years ago. Yet what a sad change has been wrought over this land in such a comparatively short period of time! How deeply grieved the patriot Pinkney would have been could he have foreseen that his be- loved country would so soon become the easy prey of an artful foe, who would successfully exact from the American people a much heavier tribute than a paltry quarter of a million, in THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 79 fact, countless millions of dollars, and would collect that tribute over and over again in the shape of a direct taxation on the very necessaries of life. The early history of our country is repeating itself. Once more a "taxation without representation" is taking place, and is being levied in the same manner as of yore, — by a superior force. But, unlike olden times, we are to all appearances quite indifferent to the fact. We do not even clearly realize that such a taxation is taking place. Although very far from being comfortable, we are unconscious of the primary cause of our discomfort : we do not perceive the bane- ful influence exercised upon our social well-being by the all-powerful enemy who is taxing us so unmer- cifully. WHO IS THE ENEMY? Our forefathers were peremptorily ordered to pay a certain tribute to His Majesty the King of England and his royal nobility. They refused to do so, and, upon repeated attempts to enforce the payments, they rose in their wrath and gave the Boston tea party^ followed by the battles of Lexington, Bunker Hill, and other manifestations of their angry protest. It was comparatively easy for the American pion- eers in the cause of freedom to assume the disguise of savages and throw the tea overboard, for there was the culpable tea to be disposed of. Similarly, it was a patriotic yet an obvious task to gather minute men Bo KINGS OF WEALTH VS. and fight the redcoats: for there were the redcoats in person to be shot at. To-day it is quite different. Nothing- to throw overboard; no one to shoot at. The enemy is not in sight. We only guess that there must be an enemy, for we feel the results of his machinations. But the crafty one is hiding himself so skilfully that whatever is seen of him appears as indistinct and unassailable as a phantom. To-day we are not ordered to pay any tribute. Far from it ; we are suavely led to believe that we are pay- ing tribute to no one ; at the same time we are quietly made to pay it, having been gradually reduced to a condition in which, in order to maintain our physical existence, we must pay a perpetual tribute, in high prices, to a number of our industrial "majesties." Thus it has come to pass that, being lulled into a belief that we are paying no tribute, we arise neither in wrath nor otherwise, but simply keep on paying and paying. CEASELESS FLOW OF TRIBUTE TO MONOPOLISTS The second decade of the twentieth century is wit- nessing a spectacle of which we, as self-governed people, can hardly feel proud: a hundred millions of intelligent persons are ensnared and cajoled into pay- ing a heavy tribute to a handful of clever monopolists. True, the people grumble and argue and fume; but pay they must, and pay they surely do. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE gi At the expense of the hard-earned wages; at the sacrifice of the welfare and comfort of wives and chil- dren ; in hard times and in good times ; they are con- tinually paying the arbitrary taxes and filling to re- pletion the purses of their industrial masters. The tribute proposed by France or the tea tax de- manded by George III were mere trifles in comparison with the burdens under which the American people are groaning to-day. From the cradle and to the grave; from babyhood to old age — American children, women and men are paying a ceaseless tribute to the autocratic unlimited owners of American industries. An infant in its first food pays its first pennies to the milk, cracker and other monopolists and trusts; its mother, to sustain the strength so needed in her motherhood, must pay a heavy tribute to the beef, sugar, coffee, cold-storage, and various other trusts ; while its father is compelled to pay the heaviest share of all in tribute to the leather, coal, oil, tobacco, and other monopolies too numerous to mention. Should any of the family travel, a tribute is levied on them by the railroad, Pullman Car, express, and other "road agents" ; should they seek amusement, the tribute goes to the theatrical, race track, and other monopolies; and so on ad infinitum. At last, when grim death has overtaken a tribute-payer, his mortal remains have to make the final, post-mortem tribute payment to the coffin, nail and cemetery monopolies. A sheep is fleeced but once a year; the American 82 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, lamb is shorn daily, all the year around, even unto death. TRUSTS ARE ADVANCE GUARDS OF CIVILIZATION American people, actuated by the seldom erring in- stinct of a multitude, designate their invisible foe and tribute-taker under the general name of "Trusts." Trusts are combinations of large industrial bodies, dealing in the same kind of commodities, and pos- sessing largely the control of the markets, of the out- put, prices, etc. Yet, if properly directed, they are far from being objectionable. In fact, they are de- signed to be highly beneficial to the people at large. To abolish them would be equivalent to taking a step backward on the path of civilization. Strange as it may seem to those who are so deeply incensed against them, trusts are meant to be, — and under natural conditions would have been, — the AD- VANCE GUARDS OF CIVILIZATION. They can be made extremely beneficial agents under civiliza- tion's command. The most economic processes of production and dis- tribution and the almost entire elimination of harmful waste were made possible only by application of a practical principle of combination. This principle is perfected in the trusts and is often indispensable for lessening the cost of production and for a consequent spread of prosperity among the people. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 83 The odium attached to the word "trusts," which makes them hateful to the popular mind, is not due to the fact that they are perfected combinations, but to the exercise of the great monopoly power to the detri- ment of the people, instead of to their advantage. It is not the nature of combinations, or the union of combinations called "trusts," that is objectionable; but the force which guides them to do evil instead of good. THE SOULS OF TRUSTS ARE GUILTY It is curious to note that, although much has been said about this trust question, and all possible pros and contras were advanced, the most essential part of the whole has ever been passed unnoticed, namely, that trusts are only convenient instruments in the hands of those eminently gifted individuals who own and direct them; who may, with reason, be con- sidered as THE SOULS OF TRUSTS; and who, however unconsciously or unwittingly, are the prime movers of all the evil perpetrated by modern trusts. Trusts have, as a rule, only a few influential stock- holders. Although in some cases, when the popular game of "watering" the stock had been resorted to, a number of persons were "taken in," but they are hardly more important than if they were a set of wooden dummies. The complete control and mastery of the affairs of trusts rests, without exception, with a very few, at most a dozen, of the principal stock- 84 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, holders whose holdings often run into many millions of dollars. These are the dominating spirits, the real lords of industries, who wield the dangerous power of private monopoly at their discretion and direct the energies of trusts to good or evil, as they choose. These industrial leaders, the Kings of Wealth, with all their undeniable talents and often genius, are, un- fortunately for the people, actuated in their actions not by the desire to serve the public good, but by the seemingly incurable mania of self-aggrandizement. Spurred by it, they pervert the noble and beneficent mission of combinations and trusts, — to serve the people, — into the petty and ignoble aim of serving the few and enriching them at the expense of the people. It is important to bear this in mind, as it is the key to the deplorable condition of the modern industrial world. MONOPOLISTIC SHAREHOLDING ILLUS- TRATED The "Big Six," as the beef trust is called in the official Report of the Commissioner on Corporations, consists of Armour & Co., Swift & Co., Cudahy Co., National Packing Co., and two others. The Commis- sioner says: "They are the only shippers of dressed beef in America, the private monopoly in this line being complete." The stock ownership in the Ar- mour & Co., as given in the report, is very simple: J. Ogden Armour and his family OWN ALL THE iTHE AMERICAN PEOPLE 85 STOCK, It is the principal company of the now notorious "Beef Trust." In addition to this, the Ar- mours own outright, or completely control, a number of other concerns comprising the combination. The National Packing Company is owned by three families, in the following ratio: The Armours, 46% of the stock; the Swifts, 42%, and the Morrises, 12%. The number of stockholders in the Cudahy Com- pany, as reported to the State of Kansas, consists of eight persons. As the capitalization of the company is (un-watered) eight millions of dollars, an average shareholding in this branch of the beef trust is one million for each of the eight owners. The Commissioner concludes with this remark: "The stock of all these companies is very closely held, the principal stockholders being members of respective families, except for a small amount of scat- tered stock." Thus, the beef industry of these United States is a FAMILY AFFAIR of Armours, Swifts, Morrises, and a few others. Is it any wonder that the price of meat for our consumption is soaring sky high? It is "fixed" for us by an all-powerful "family." TOBACCO, RAILROAD AND STEEL KINGS In the Report of the Commissioner of Corporations on the Tobacco Industry we find : The American To- bacco Company stands in a controlling position over 86 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, the entire tobacco combination (tobacco trust), with its eighty-six companies. The control of the American Tobacco Company itself rests in the hands of a very few persons: ten largest stockholders hold together sixty per cent, of the entire capitalization. These "Big Ten" are "dominating the entire combination." Then the Commissioner gives the familiar names of ten autocrats of the tobacco industry of the American people: J. B. Duke, T. F. Ryan, O. H. Payne, and others. He adds : "These ten millionaire stockholders own two hundred and seventy thousand shares, valued at $135,000,000." A handsome average of thir- teen million and a half for each of the owners and rulers of the American tobacco industry. Again a family affair! In regard to the railroads of our country, we learn from another Commissioner, on Interstate Commerce, that "About one hundred persons are controlling all the railroads, whose capitalization reaches thirteen bil- lions, and the net earnings, distributed in dividends, exceed two hundred and twenty millions per annum." A nice slice of the national wealth surrendered, uncon- ditionally, to the mercies of the "Big Hundred" of the railroad world! But there are still bigger fish in the American indus- trial pond. For instance, the steel trust is ruled by "Interests," whose shareholding is immense. A promi- nent official, interviewed recently upon the subject, said that, in his opinion, individual holdings in the steel combination are not large. "No one man," said THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 87 he, ''owns in the United States Steel Corporation more than 250,000 shares, worth only $25,000,000." Andrew Carnegie held "only" $50,000,000 worth of shares in his own trust; John D. Rockefeller, the re- tired, owns "only" $100,000,000 worth of shares in his giant trust. And there are others. TRUST OWNERS ARE TWENTIETH CENTURY MACHIAVELLIS These millionaire stockholders, while managing trusts sometimes personally, at other times through subordinate "captains of industry," are the real rulers of all the important American industries; rulers, not in name, but in fact. They may do anything they please, and they certainly are exercising their right to the utmost. Having once conceded to them the au- thority, we may not gainsay them. These industrial barons are wielding all the power that feudal barons ever possessed, except the right of taking our lives directly. They may not with impun- ity kill us outright. They may, however, — and they certainly do, — take our lives indirectly, by raising to a prohibitive figure the prices of all the necessities of life. At all events, it is within their power to make our lives miserable by creating disastrous pan^'cs, hard times, unemployment, etc. In short, the American people are at their mercy. To believe that they can be "controlled" from Washington is a puerile fancy, an obvious absurdity. 88 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. The most vivid example of the fearful power of the trust manipulators was given recently by the all-grasp- ing ice trust in the city of New York. It unexpectedly advanced the price of ice, in the middle of summer, by over ioo%, making its use practically prohibitive for the poorer population of the most congested districts of the city. The action of this veritable Herod of the twentieth century has slain at one stroke many thousands of innocent infants. But, as the slaughter was done indirectly (and legally), the slayer was not outlawed, as in justice he should have been. All trust owners are not, of course, of this atrocious caliber. They are, as a rule, inoffensive and able busi- ness men, abiding by the laws of the land, and only exercising freely the rights and privileges conferred upon them by the people of this free republic. Unfor- tunately, being possessed by an almost insane mania of accumulating wealth, they hesitate at nothing. Ac- cording to their Machiavellian creed, "the end justi- fies the means." Their refinement, their qualities as gentlemen are set aside, and in their scramble for "more wealth" they stoop to bribery, conspiracy, re- bating, corruption of officials, perjury, savage cruelty toward competitors, and other nefarious means. They are, indeed, the twentieth century Machiavellis, striv- ing to acquire riches by fair means if possible, by foul if necessary. This mania of self-aggrandizement has prompted them c': late to do their very worst. Forgetting all THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 89 caution, and oblivious to the dictates of humanity and even of common decency, they have launched into a heartless and brazen campaign of still further enrich- ing themselves at the expense of the American people, by impudent stock-watering (which is nothing but a theft by wholesale in a legal disguise), and, worst of all, by arbitrarily raising the prices of almost all the necessaries of life. Who else may be held responsible for the misdeeds of the trusts, but their helmsmen, the millionaire stockholders? The trusts themselves, mere passive tools in clever hands, cannot be blamed for the doings of their mighty rulers. And it would be senseless to demand that trusts be abolished because their rul- ers are misdirecting them. A steamer is not put out of commission because its captain is found to be a wicked man; the principle at the foundation of a sav- ings bank is not abandoned because a bank president is proven to be a defaulter. There is no better rea- son for rejecting the principle of combination than in the cited instances of steam locomotion and a sav- ings bank. Therefore, our task has narrowed to finding the means of effectually curbing the monomaniacs who own and misdirect the trusts. Yet, before proceeding further, it is well to inquire whether the trust magnates alone are guilty of the offense of raising the prices of the necessaries of life, or perhaps some other factors are also responsible for committing the same offense. 90 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. THE REMARKABLE BEEF AUTOCRAT Perhaps the cattle-raisers and the "greedy" retailers have caused the unwarranted rise in the prices of meat designed for consumption by the American people? Turning to the official investigations, vv^e find that the cattle-raisers, far from dictating the prices, have themselves complained so persistently of being abused by the great beef packers, who, by "fixing" the prices, allowed them only a mere pittance for their cattle on the hoof, — that the government was forced to thor- oughly investigate the matter. Upon said investiga- tion it has been proven conclusively that the profits allowed the cattle-raisers by the packers were so small as to completely exonerate them from the charge of extortion. As regards the retailing butchers, let them speak for themselves. At a recent meeting of the United Master Butchers' Association the Secretary of the As- sociation, D. J. Haley, said: "The greed of the beef trust surpasses all bounds. With this last increase in the prices of carcasses the price of beef to-day is the highest ever known. These constant increases are LITTLE SHORT OF ROBBERY." As far as known, Mr. Haley is neither an Anarchist nor Socialist ; he is an influential master butcher, and speaks as becomes an outraged American citizen. But perhaps the trust in question was prompted by the danger of facing a loss in business? Very far THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 91 from it. In the latest report of Armour & Co. the net earnings for the last twelvemonth were shown to exceed 35.5% of the total capitalization. The Swift & Co., the next in order of importance, show for the same period a net profit of 13.6% on the capitalization of sixty millions, forty millions of which is pure water. In spite of such immense profits, bordering on usury, the price of meat for our consumption has steadily increased within the same period of time by over fifty per cent. For this we are obviously in- debted to no other cause but the arbitrary mandate of the beef autocrat. To show further that there has not been a shadow of justification for the beef trust to so persistently and vigorously increase the prices of meat, it is sufficient to take a look at the export figures of American beef. The same trust, during the same twelve months, has exported to England alone half a billion pounds of frozen beef. And, what is still more interesting, this exported beef was sold at prices from 25% to 40% lower than at home. It is almost unbelievable, yet such is the fact. If it pays to export American beef, and, moreover, to sell it to the foreigner so much cheaper, then by what right, human or divine, do the impudent monopolists force us to pay, in America, such extortionate prices for our own American beef? The latest Census Report shows that within the last 10 years the population of the United States has in- creased 21%; yet during the same period of time the meat production by the disheartened cattle-raisers 92 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. has actually decreased: the number of cattle has de- creased by over 3,000,000; sheep, by over 5,000,000, etc. Even hogs are decreased in number, although their selling value to us, the consumers, has increased by over $100,000,000. Thus, the more people we have, the less they have to eat and the more to pay for what they do eat, — thanks to the rapacious beef autocrat. Is it not obvious that the cattle-raisers, who receive but a small allowance from the trust for their cattle on the hoof; the retailing tradesmen and butchers, who are steadily driven out of business and are forced to become the servile tools of the trust; and the "ex- travagant" consumers, the people, who are compelled to pay arbitrary and exorbitant prices, — much higher than foreigners do, — for what they must purchase; — all are unmercifully fleeced by this "family affair," the twentieth century wonder, the remarkable Beef Autocrat. If still further proofs of the high-handed methods of the beef trust are necessary, the reader will find them in the quoted report. Suffice it to state here that it was proven by oral and documentary evidence that the heads of various corporations, comprising the trust, "held weekly secret meetings, at which they arbitrarily fixed the prices of beef, to suit themselves" and "checked off competition by means of gentlemen's [(?) agreements." At the time of writing these lines this remarkably easy process of "fixing the prices" of one of the prime THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 93 necessities of life, — the principal food of the American people, — by the trust magnates, "to suit themselves," has not by any means ceased, in defiance of scathing official denunciations and public indignation; and, if anything, it is on the increase. COLD STORAGE TRUST CORNERING PERISH- ABLE FOOD Perhaps our farmer producer is greedy and causes the high cost of living by exacting arbitrary prices for his products? In order to answer this question we must make a closer acquaintance with the latest arrival in trust- dom, — the Cold Storage Trust. There are in the United States over 800 cold-storage warehouses, the business of storing food having proved highly lucrative. It is needless to say that all have been taken in by a giant combine, which has absolute power over this nation's supply of the so-called "perishable" foods such as beef, butter, eggs, poultry, fruit, vege- tables, etc. The emissaries of this private monopoly scour the country during the summer months, buying in at the lowest prices possible all the butter, eggs, poultry, etc., and storing them for future use. Later on, this trust, emulating the example of Joseph of Egypt, dis- poses of its stored wealth at prices advanced some two or three hundred per cent. In this manner the ingenious cold-storage device, ^^ 94 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. meant to benefit the people, is made to serve a private monopoly. The cold-storage manipulators grow im- mensely rich, while the people can no longer obtain cheaply, even in summer, such food as butter, eggs, etc., because the trust "corners" all perishable food. And when winter arrives the people are expected, as a matter of course, to pay "fancy" prices for sup- posedly "fancy" butter, eggs, etc. More than one hundred and twenty-five millions of pounds of butter alone is stored by this particular trust during the summer months. The obvious result of such a wholesale "cornering" of butter became manifest of late, as we are compelled to pay for but- ter in the midst of summer the prices we used to pay only in midwinter. The newcomer is encouraged by the unsavory ex- ample of its elder brethren, notably by the all-power- ful beef trust; and the older this newest "infant in- dustry" grows, the more rapacious it becomes. And the end is not yet in sight. Designed to be of ines- timable benefit to the American people, it shows al- ready a fair promise of speedily developing into a mighty fiend among fiends. PRIVATE REFRIGERATING CAR MONOPOLY In its questionable transactions the cold-storage monopoly has an efficient and faithful ally in a private refrigerating car trust. This institution is so thor- oughly un-American as to require a word of ex- THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 95 planation as regards its position in the industrial world. There are in use in this country one hundred and fifty thousand private refrigerating cars, which are chiefly the private property of the all-powerful beef trust, but are cheerfully loaned to the allies, for a consideration, as the occasion may arise. These pri- vate cars are operated on equally "private" lines; but they are always made welcome by and given the right of way on any railroad in the United States. The ''special rates" granted to these cars are so low that their owners naturally have an immense advantage over the common shippers, who have to pay common freight rates. The legal status of this private car institution is only winked at: for some reason it does not appear expedient to have them declared illegal. However, the Interstate Commerce Commissioner has this to say about them : "The gross favoritism and discrimi- nation, arising from the use and operation of the pri- vate car lines, have caused wide complaint and have created an earnest demand for legislation to correct such evil." But the "evil" has not been corrected as yet. With the help of this semi-legal institution, the cold-storage trust has the practical monopoly of deal- ing in all kinds of food, from a California strawberry to a Texas steer. All the fruit we eat, whether it grows in Oregon or Georgia, Southern California or Northern Maine, comes to us in "private refrigerating 96 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. cars/' All the turkeys, poultry, eggs, apples, etc., come the same way. In short, the monopoly is com- plete and far-reaching. The results are obvious. The farmer has to abide by what the trust will allow him for his produce. His orchard may be overladen with fruit, but the abundant crop will surely rot unless he consents to the trust's own prices. For he has no "private" cars for shipping and the common freight rates are too high for shipping at profit. The special prices "fixed" for the farmer by the trust are so low that orchard after orchard is aban- doned and the formerly prosperous orchardist migrates to the city to swell the ranks of the unemployed. Meanwhile the people are paying for all perishable food enormously high prices, which are also "fixed" for them by the same trust. In this way the cold-storage monopoly does what all private monopolies are doing: It fixes the prices both for the farmer-producer and for the people-con- sumer. It exploits both the farmer and the consumer. It kills two birds with one stone. BUTTER AND EGG BOARD In order to squeeze the farmer thoroughly, yet with some display of commercial decency, the cold-storage monopoly is keeping on pay a servitor known to the people under the name of a Butter and Egg Board of Chicago. The principal duty of this commercial "fakir" is to issue throughout the country districts extremely low quotations, designed for the farmer, not tTHE AMERICAN PEOPLE 97 the consumer. Without such "fixed" quotations the emissaries of the monopoly might have found farmers unprepared to part with the products of their hard toil for a mere song; with the help of the bogus quo- tations the process of squeezing goes on smoothly and uninterruptedly. The practices of this accommodating board became so audacious that some of the farmers unravelled the fraud, and the Government was compelled to step in and take the matter into the courts, where it rests at the present time. What will be the result remains to be seen. As the logical outcome of the machinations of this monopoly in perishable food, the conditions at the present time are both abnormal and highly injurious to the comfort and welfare of the American people. We find the following striking items recorded in the official reports: "During the last fifteen years po- tatoes have advanced in price 100%, butter 150%, eggs 200%, and so on." Thus the farmer may also be exonerated from the accusation of charging extortionate prices for the goods produced by him. On the other hand, the cold- storage monopoly and its allies stand guilty of squeez- ing both the farmer and the consumer. MILK TRUST TAXING AMERICAN BABIES Another false servant of the American people, the Milk Trust, owning a cold-storage of its own, has made several advances in the price of milk lately, and 98 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. evidently liked the process so well that, when the beef, cold-storage and other trusts declared a crusade against the people's pocketbook, it joined in the game with a will, and raised the price of milk to the top notch. But the ''unreasonable" people did not like it, milk being an article almost indispensable even in the humblest households. They instituted such a loud protest that the government had to take notice. The Attorney-General of the State of New York has taken the matter into the Supreme Court, and has succeeded in proving that the transgressor is ''controlling over 80% of the supply of milk, having practically a mo- nopoly, 'fixing' the extremely low prices to be paid to the farmer, and correspondingly high prices to be exacted from the consumer. . . . The advance in price of milk was made solely for providing larger dividends for individuals at the expense of the con- sumers." An official investigation of the books of this trust has revealed the following facts : Of the twenty-five millions of capitalization of the principal company of the trust, fifteen millions were issued in compensa- tion for good will, trade marks, etc.; in other words, they are water, pure and simple. The net earnings for the year ending September 30, 1913, were two mil- lion six hundred thousand dollars, making a hand- some profit of 28 per cent. In spite of such fine earn- i igs, the trust has since advanced the price of milk for the consumer by fifteen per cent.! This trust has also established an auxiliary institu- THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 99 tion similar to the famous Butter Board of Chicago. The name of this concern is the Consolidated Milk Exchange. The principal duties of this "Exchange" are the usual ''fixing" of the prices which are to be paid to the farmer-producer and of another set of en- tirely different prices to be demanded from the people, the consumer. The first set is three cents and down; the second, nine cents and up. The difference, two hundred per cent., is presumably a fair "exchange," compensating the trust for the labor of bottling and distribution. The obviously enormous net profit is that milk tax which American babies are called upon to contribute to the trust's millionaire shareholders. Is it to be wondered at that dairymen find the keep- ing of cows unprofitable, and are feeding their hogs and chickens with milk rather than sell it to the greedy trust at the insignificant "fixed" price gra- ciously "allowed" them? The result is apparent: pro- duction of milk is lessened and a new reason is ad- vanced for a further raise in the price for the con- sumer. And the people? Why, they have to pay the increased price, or — go without milk. Although several of the directors of this infamous exchange are under indictment, and the exchange it- self had to remove to a neighboring State in order to escape further legal prosecution, — the nefarious busi- ness still goes on uninterruptedly and is flourishing. lOO KINGS OF WEALTH VS. PRICES DOUBLED AND TREBLED BY THE TRUSTS By similar methods and in like manner numerous trusts, which have sprung into existence within the last few years, are taxing the people without mercy. Their "little short of robbery" tactics have been crowned with complete success. A biased Congress gave them a whitewash immunity bath, learned sci- entists having proclaimed them only partially guilty, laying the chief blame for high prices on the supposi- titious abundance of gold and other "scientific" causes. Meanwhile, the prices have been steadily going up and up to such a surprising degree that where formerly we paid one dollar to-day we are compelled to pay two or three dollars. For instance, we used to pay for a keg of wire nails $1.35, but, with the advent of a nail trust, the price went up to $3.60; barb-wire has ad- vanced, per 100 lbs., from $1.65 to $4.25; tin plate, per box, from $2.80 to $4.85; window glass, per box, from $1.75 to $5.00; and so on. On the average the prices of all these "protected" trust commodities have increased by 175 per cent. Seventeen years ago the American people, led by the famous Mark Hanna and other trust organizers, indulged in a triumphant refrain: "When November comes around no 50-cent dollar will be found." Seven- teen Novembers have since arrived and passed, and behold — a forty-cent dollar has been found. As the prices have advanced by over 60 per cent., the pur- THE AMERICAN PEOPLE loi chasing value of a dollar is to-day only 40 cents, in comparison with what it was seventeen years ago. An excellent explanation of the source of some of the advances in prices is presented by a bit of interest- ing information, freely circulated some time ago. It was reported that the powerful steel "interests," while forming a huge combine, bought off a competitor, Vul- can Mills, by agreeing to pay annually a quarter of a million of dollars for not making steel rails. An in- teresting bargain, whose sequel is obvious. In order to be able to pay annually that quarter of a million the steel trust had to resort to an extra-liberal "fix- ing" of the prices, so that the consumer would foot up the bill and also enable the trust to make a handsome profit on the transaction. MODERN HOLOCAUST OF COFFEE The means by which some of the trusts are achiev- ing their ends are highly original, to say the least. In this connection the most striking instance was pre- sented recently by a truly astonishing coffee deal con- summated in Brazil. Coffee, a favorite beverage of the American people, became so cheap, owing to a great demand for it, that the coffee interests took alarm lest their dividends might decrease. They put their heads together and concocted a scheme the like of which had never been witnessed in this world of ours. They succeeded in entangling the largest of the coffee-producing States I02 KINGS OF WEALTH VS\ of Brazil, the State of San Paulo, into a coffee loan of $75,000,000. Once the victim was financially en- trapped the rest became easy. Burdened with a heavy bonded obligation, the government of San Paulo had to agree with the coffee interests to limit the export of coffee to the United States to ten million bags a year. Of course, the price of coffee in the United States immediately went up, and is as high as it pos- sibly could be. Some of the coffee planters, who had not been con- sulted in regard to this deal, advanced very vigorous objections. To pacify them the government decided, upon another consultation with their bonded masters, to choose a lesser evil, namely, to purchase from the planters their total output, and then— TO BURN ALL COFFEE IN EXCESS OF THE STIPULATED 10,000,000 BAGS. By this now famous scheme, called a valorization trick, Arbuckle and his associate coffee barons suc- ceeded not only in dictating to an independent state (which, in itself, shows the marvelous power of a private monopoly), but also actually LIMITED THE INDUSTRY OF ONE COUNTRY, IN ORDER TO CREATE A SCARCITY OF COFFEE IN THE OTHER COUNTRY. Will Uncle Sam slumber peacefully much longer? Our fellow-sufferer, the Brazilian coffee planter, is thus graciously permitted to continue his plantation labors, but he has the humiliation of eventually wit- nessing the wanton destruction of the coffee which he THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 103 had raised, picked and carried to the seaport, for no better a purpose than to go up in smoke. Commenting upon this surprising deal, the "London Economist," a highly respectable publication, says: "The scheme is about as sound as the breaking of the plate glass in the interest of the glaziers. To spend labor and capital in the production of food, and then to make a holocaust of the gathered food, is too child- ish for real criticism." "Childish" is not an adequate word to designate such high-handed practices of defying bountiful crops and artificially raising the price on the people's favor- ite beverage. "Criminal" is a much more appropriate word, for the results are self-evident : decreased com- fort for the poorer portion of our population and the increased tribute payment for those who are, as yet, able to pay the high prices. Your grocer is charging you from 25 to 60 cents for a pound of coffee, which, had the "smart" trick of the coffee trust miscarried, would have cost you only 15 cents a pound, or less. MONOPOLIZED RAILROADS ALLIES OF TRUSTS It would be tiresome, indeed, to recount the mis- deeds of all the trusts, for their methods are similar. We have not inquired into the shady doings of the starch trust, the Standard Oil, nor of that thieving cheat, the Sugar Trust ; and we shall leave them alone. But the picture of spoils and depredations would have 104 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. been incomplete had we omitted the railroad mag- nates, for they are playing a highly important part in creating the high cost of living for the American people. There is scarcely an industry of such vital impor- tance as railway public carriers. Railroads are likened, with excellent reason, to the arteries of a human body; for, with their help, the life blood of the nation is carried to all parts, no matter how distant, wherever and whenever it is needed. Should the railroads be- come out of order, or indulge in "crooked" practices, the life of the nation would be immediately crippled. As the principal means for communication and trans- portation, the railroads are of the utmost import to the people. The railroad freight and passenger rates are their prices. An increase in any of them affects at once everything else in our social life. For instance, an increase in a freight rate on apples is bound to im- mediately raise the market price of apples. Should the freight rates become unreasonably high, the prices of all commodities would become correspondingly high. A monopoly in railroads is the most pernicious of all monopolies, and the most far-reaching. In this connection the Interstate Commissioner, in his annual report, says: ''Competition between our carriers by rail, which so far acted as a check or re- straint against unreasonable rates, has been to a great extent suppressed and destroyed. ... As the result of consolidation of all the railroads into a half a dozen THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 105 groups, the shipper has no longer a choice, but must submit to the rates charged, whether reasona ' ^r unreasonable." Here again we find the American people officially declared at the mercy of the monopo- lists ! The railroads have ever been the stanchest allies of the trusts of all descriptions, especially of the Coal Trust. They have always exhibited open favoritism and rendered all the help in their power to those who were at the head of trusts. Unlawful rebates, special discriminating rates, private cars, etc., were ever the means to cement the alliance. In addition to this it is interesting to note that over 96% of the coal mines in America are owned and controlled by the railroads, who are "fixing" the prices for the consumer at from $6 to $7 per ton, against about $3.50, the cost of min- ing and transportation. An annual tribute of from one to two hundred million dollars is exacted from the American people by this coal-railroad monopoly alone ! Thus the '^unreasonable" rates which our farmers and other common shippers "have to submit to" are steadily forcing them out of business, while the Coal- Railroad Kings are growing richer and richer, so that their wealth is no longer counted by mere millions, but by tens of millions. Oh, how prosperous we are! io6 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, DRY GOODS TRUST DENOUNCING ITS BRETHREN In conclusion we shall call to the stand an entirely unprejudiced witness, the Wholesale Dry Goods As- sociation, a newly organized trust. It comprises in the city of New York alone 132 wholesalers and re- tailers, and is affiliated with more than twenty-eight thousand dry goods merchants throughout the country. The chairman of the association, Frederick B. Ship- ley, said recently: "The control of the cotton textiles of the entire country is in the hands of the manufac- turers (Cotton Trust), who are able to 'fix' arbi- trarily the prices not only for the wholesalers and re- tailers, but even for the importers. It means that the American people have to pay at least one-third more for their own cotton goods than is paid for them in Europe. When I tell you that this country uses an- nually cotton goods to the amount of one and one- half billion of dollars, you will readily see what this excess price means, and that manufacturers are rapidly growing rich at the expense of the American people, — at the expense of poor men." "While the cotton is grown, spun and woven, and made up in the United States," continues Mr. Ship- ley, "Americans at home are paying 33 1/3% more than the purchasers in Europe. Yet, by reason of im- proved machinery, we are manufacturing cotton con- siderably cheaper than it is possible abroad. . . . The iTHE AMERICAN PEOPLE 107 wages Daid over here do not exceed nine per cent, of ;the entire cost." Many thanks, Mr. Shipley. Thus, from the mouth of ''one of them" we have re- ceived ample corroboration of the conclusions arrived at in our inquiry. According to this valuable testi- mony, the trusts are guilty of "fixing arbitrary prices"; of making us pay at home for our own goods "one- third more than is paid in Europe" ; of enriching them- selves "at the expense of the American people"; and of paying only a pittance to the workmen, being aided by improvements in machinery. A powerful arraign- ment and delivered with righteous indignation. Com- ing from such a source, it is doubly valuable. INDUSTRIAL MILLIONAIRISM IS UN- DESIRABLE We have seen that with the invention of innumer- able labor-saving devices, and with the adoption of production and distribution on a large scale, the goods produced and distributed should naturally be much cheaper and most accessible to the "greatest number" of persons, spreading real prosperity among the American people. We have seen that such natural and beneficial ef- fects of the progress of civilization are not in evidence to-day mainly because some reactionary force has de- prived the American people of such benefits, having arbitrarily and unnaturally limited production by forc- ing down the prices to be paid to the farmer-producer io8 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, and raising up the prices to be exacted from the peo- ple-consumers, — especially oi.U ^ necessaries of life. We have seen that everything points to the trusts as the reactionary force in question ; that trusts them- selves, as large combinations of capital, are a pro- gressive force, and would have been of inestimable benefit to the people had they been properly guided. They v^ould certainly have been the means of reducing the prices for consumers, and not increasing them. They w^ould have been real advance guards of civiliza- tion if only they were directed to do good, not evil. We have also seen that the guiding spirits of trusts, the millionaire shareholders and practical owners, are guilty of misdirecting the latent energies of trusts for good and turning them to evil. These "souls" of trusts are prompted almost exclusively by nothing better than selfish motives of self-aggrandizement, and seek- ing the attainment of their ends, like Machiavelli of old, by any means within reach, whether fair or foul. Step by step we have arrived at a point where a logical conclusion forces itself upon us. Whereas a reactionary force retards the progress of civilization, depriving the people of its benefits, and Whereas, the millionaire shareholders, the owners of trusts, are the prime movers of the said reaction- ary force. Therefore, it is plain that said directors of the reac- tionary force are undesirable and should be divested of their power for evil. The Special Privilege of THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 109 Monopoly should be withdrawn from them, for it rightfully belongs only to the people as a whole, and was conferred upon private individuals most unwisely. The history of the last fifty years has clearly demon- strated that, as long as individuals are permitted to acquire and own unlimited interests in any industry, they will eventually own the industries themselves, and will run them "to suit themselves," while the people will be deprived of any voice in the matter; industrial kings will become their "bosses" and the people their servants, either as dependent "employees," or as humble customers and tribute-payers. Millionaire stockholders, trust rulers, monopolists and dictators of prices on the necessities of the people ; despots who "limit" production and drive the farmer- producer out of business by denying him his legiti- mate profits; who create an artificial scarcity of food for the people that they may tax them the harder; who retard the onward progress of civilization, and, instead of spreading comfort and ease, spread broad- cast misery and destitution; such millionaires are an anomaly in human society, and such millionaires' legal extinction should "devoutly be wished for"; for such millionaires there is no room in a land of free people, in a democratic republic; from such millionaires we can never be delivered too soon ! Can anything but a direct law limiting "private pos- sessions" dispose of such millionaires, forever and evermore? no KINGS OF WEALTH VS. CHAPTER V Unemployment — Question of Life or Death for Millions UNEMPLOYMENT IS UNKNOWN AMONG ANIMALS AND SAVAGES The question of unemployment does not exist in the animal kingdom. The birds have no difficulty in find- ing the seeds and berries necessary for their sus- tenance ; the grazing animals find grass in abundance ; the bears, plenty of honey ; and the lions, their prey to feast upon. There the lack of means for maintaining existence, unemployment, is a myth. The personal exertions of any animal, as a rule, are speedily re- warded by the attainment of the desired results, — food and shelter. The animal kingdom has no beg- gars or paupers; neither has it grab-it-all monsters. These are found only in the human kingdom, where they flourish amidst congenial surroundings. A savage, in a state of primitive simplicity, leads a life of ease and freedom. He indulges in pleasurable hunting, warring, and other similar pastimes and rec- reations, which are, at the same time, furnishing him with the means for existence. His squaw and children cook his food, dress the skins of slain animals, make garments and moccasins ; while he, during his days of leisure, fashions his arms and some tools. Together they rear up their unpretentious wigwams for resi- THE AMERICAN PEOPLE iii^ dence and business. In short, everyone has some em- ployment, suitable for his age and strength. Such a primitive life is certainly devoid of many comforts, as the limited wealth of savages consists only of scanty clothing, arms, half-wild ponies, and a few other in- significant articles. No stock of provisions is ever laid by for future use, and, therefore, their existence is but precarious. Yet, though insecure, and often un- comfortable, the condition of man in a state of sav- agery does not present marked inequalities. When the tribe has a prosperous time, owing to a successful hunt or rich spoils from war, everybody shares in the good things, and no one suffers for lack of food, shel- ter or clothing. During hard times, hardships are shared by all. But prosperity on top and poverty be- low, luxury for the few and unemployment and mis- ery for the many, are unknown among savages. CAPITAL AND LABOR— UNNATURAL TWINS Flock-tending and agriculture, in the next stage of development, are favorable for the accumulation of private property in the possession of thrifty individ- uals. Although personal exertions are still important, the ownership of a shanty and a flock of sheep ad- vances the possessor to the position of a capitalist. As such, he is at liberty to indulge in a life of com- parative ease and leisure, limiting his personal activi- ties to the management of his estate and to the super- intendence over hired "help," which makes its appear- ance simultaneously with the capitalist. 11^ KINGS OF WEALTH VS. Capital and labor; employer and help; — come into existence and begin developing at the same time. They are the twins, making their initial bow side by side. But, unlike natural twins, their subsequent growth is not proportionate. In fact, it presents an inverted ratio: while capital grows stronger and fat- ter, labor becomes correspondingly weaker and leaner. Opportunities for amassing larger accumulations of private property increase with the advance of civiliza- tion, until to-day one may become a veritable nabob, worth many millions of dollars; lead a life of sump- tuous luxury heretofore unheard of; boss over and profit by the labor of thousands of now helpless "help" ; and, withal, be considered a benefactor of man- kind, with about as much justice as a bear appropri- ating the contents of a beehive may be considered a benefactor of bees. Bi' o the annoyance of these huge appropriators of the people's wealth, a question of ''unemployment" appears on the stage, at first uncertainly, but after a while assuming proportions which draw the attention of everyone. Much to the chagrin of men of wealth, it has risen of late to the dignity of a grave national problem demanding an immediate and satisfactory so- lution. The fact is that at the present time, when we have apparently reached the highest state of prosperity and civilization, hundreds of thousands of our fellow- citizens are unable to obtain any work, while mil- lions are employed on part-time only, less than six out THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 113: of twelve months. The problem is indeed very grave. It is a question of life or death for a great many of our fellow-men. But the solution is woefully lacking. CIVILIZATION BEGETS UNEMPLOYMENT Simultaneous development of capitalism and unem- ployment is not accidental. It is based upon the na- ture of private property. It demonstrates that their relation is that of a necessary sequence: one is the cause of the other. About a hundred years ago the venerable La Fay- ette, addressing a large open-air meeting in the city of Boston, exclaimed ''Where are your poor? In this assembly I see them not. They seem to be found no- where in America." How thoroughly contented his hearers must have been ! Those were glorious times, and the American people may be justly proud of that period, feeling now a deep regret that it is past and gone. Is it possible that there was a time when poverty was not present in this land? It seems a chimera, a dream; because we are told that poverty is an institution which is to abide with us forever, no matter how prosperous we may become. Perhaps La Fayette was mistaken? Hardly. A hundred years ago the people of the United States were indeed prosperous. They could claim and ob- tain, for the mere asking, all the land they needed for their homesteads. True, the giant industries were yet in embryo; but, as a matter of consequence, unem- 114 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. ployment and poverty did not disgrace this fair land, and could not have been possible in the midst of real plenty accessible to all. At present, with no more land to be had, and with all the important industries in the safe-keeping of a few persons, the majority of Americans have, the same as savages, nothing but their personal services to rely on for securing for themselves the necessaries and scant comforts of life. Yet, unlike savages, they have no free prairies to roam over, no deer to slay ; nothing except the doubtful privilege of extending an offer of their personal services, in an open industrial market, and receive in exchange an average market existence wage. And, if their services are, as often happens, ^^not wanted," they have to face that dread problem of unemployment, the disgrace of the twentieth century. Thus, at the highest point of civilization, the ma- jority of American people, homeless and without any property worth mentioning, ARE WORSE OFF THAN THE SAVAGES OR EVEN DUMB ANI- MALS! Is civilization a cruel mockery? It certainly is more harmful to the American people than the environment of savagery was for the redskins. But, if civilization is not to be blamed, then who or what is that evil fac- tor which forces it to bear such bitter fruit? Unemployment is the effect; what is its cause? Common sense revolts from impugning civilization itself of being the cause of the evil. Civilization, like the principle of a combination involved in the forma- THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 115 tion of trusts, was meant by its nature to be of in- estimable benefit to mankind; unfortunately, it was also sidetracked, and made a source of evil instead of good. Let us try to find the culprit. PILGRIM FATHERS VANGUARD OF THE UNEMPLOYED Various theories have been advanced as to the causes of unemployment. The most plausible among them is the theory of "overcrowding.'* Unemployment, as a chronic condition of mankind, is quite old. It was in its acute stage as many as 300 years ago, when the Pilgrim Fathers, the vanguard of the army of European unemployed, commenced the exodus of that army to the New World. The follow- ing reasons for the emigration of some 900 colonists, given by their leader, John Winthrop, the first Gov- ernor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, are very in- structive. They are expressed in the quaint language of olden times and are extremely earnest: 'T must tell you, my brethren, that our dear mother finds her family overcharged, as she has been forced to deny harbor to her own children. . . . England has grown weary of her inhabitants, so that man, who is the most precious of all creatures, is of less value than a horse or a sheep. . . . Many of our people have perished for want of sustenance and employment; many others live miserably and not to the honor of so bountiful a Ii6 KINGS OF V^EALTH VS, housekeeper as the Lord of Heaven and Earth is. . . . Mother-country has fulfilled its earnest desire to rid itself of the great bodies of the unemployed peo- ple. ..." From this valuable testimony we can plainly see that the problem of unemployment was in evidence many years ago, our forefathers having been made victims of this chronic ailment of mankind. For many centuries "great bodies of unemployed people" ''live miserably" and many "perish for want of sustenance and employment." As to the cause of such a wretched condition, it is supposed to be, as given by John Win- throp, an "overcharging," or, in other words, over- crowding. The "overcharging" caused "dear mother to con- ceive an earnest desire to rid itself of" the Pilgrim Fathers. Yet at that time England did not have one- tenth of the population it supports to-day. It could not have been a natural overcrowding. While the real reason is not given, it may easily be surmised by taking into consideration the fact that the principal part of the wealth of England consisted then of land, which was (and is even now) almost entirely monopolized: one-half of the kingdom being the private property of less than 8,000 persons; the peers alone, not 600 in number, own one-fourth of the geographical area and one-fifth of the entire wealth of the country ! Under the circumstances it is not at all surprising that many superfluous Englishmen, little relishing the THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 117 notion of being considered of less value "than a horse or a sheep," decided rather to brave the hardships and perils of a long sea voyage, and to emigrate to the New World. Obviously, the "overcharging" which had thus driven them away from their homes was not a natural but an artificial phenomenon, similar to that which is causing at the present time the high cost of living, the artificial "over-production," etc.; all of which is brought about by the principle of "unlimited ownership," which causes everywhere anomalous con- ditions. ARTIFICIAL OVERCROWDING CAUSES UNEMPLOYMENT The theory of natural overcrowding cannot as yet be considered as completely exploded. It has been too persistently advanced, and, strange to say, ac- cepted by many persons who should have known bet- ter. Even at the time when the redskinned warrior roamed undisturbed over the wide range of the prairies of the Far West, and the immense resources of the New World were hardly touched, some wise heads in Europe announced their grave apprehensions that "the means of subsistence cannot increase as fast as the people," and that all the distress occasioned by unem- ployment, low wages, etc., is due to a too-rapid in- crease in numbers of the population of the earth. Therefore, the wise men, with Malthus as their head, issued the sage and benign advice to the people: "to ii8 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, abstain from further multiplying themselves." TKe advice was offered in all seriousness. Wonderful to record, quite a number of learned political economists have accepted this remarkable counsel and even em- bodied it into a deeply scientific theory, named in honor of its chief exponent, the Malthusian Theory. The people, however, refused to take the counsel seri- ously and never followed the sage precepts of learned theorists. At the present time, when the unskilled labor of America's sturdy pioneers and their primitive tools have been superseded by a steam plow, a reaping ma- chine, and other ingenious devices, which have in- creased the food-producing capacity of this nation many hundreds of times, — not sages alone, but the uninitiated as well, may readily see that "the means of subsistence" can be increased almost at will. Thus the Malthusian Theory is nothing but a huge joke. Yet the "overcrowding" theory still clings to us with the tenacity of a leech. It is estimated that in the present state of advanced methods in agriculture the United States can com- fortably support a population of a billion human be- ings. As regards the supposed "overcrowding," the present density of the population in our country con- tradicts this theory flatly: our density of population is extremely low, barely twenty persons to a square mile, as against 500 or more in many places of Europe and Asia. Yet, in spite of all, we are deemed to be already THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 119 "overcrowded." Acting under the stress of such ap- prehension, our government is already forcibly ex- cluding all emigrants who have not in their possession some cash (presumably a sign of emigrant prosper- ity). It is done mainly out of fear of admitting new competitors for our supposedly "overcrowded" unem- ployed and part-employed. Thus the insignificant density of population and the wonderful progress in improved methods of producing food are proofs that we are very far from being over- crowded; the multitude of the unemployed and the exclusion of emigrants indicate that we are. Only one conclusion can be drawn from such a contradic- tion : WE ARE NOT NATURALLY OVER- CROWDED; ARTIFICIALLY WE ARE. The powerful force that causes this artificial over- crowding is exactly the same that clogs the wheels of civilization as applied to the principle of industrial combination; that diverts the benefits of labor-saving devices from their natural course; and that maims the American people without mercy. There is a saying: "All roads lead to Rome." In this case the various investigations of any and all economic iniquities of the present day lead invariably to the same central source of evil, — the inequitable dis- tribution of wealth caused by the unlimited ownership of a few Kings of Wealth. 120 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. DOES MACHINERY CREATE UNEMPLOY- MENT? The tendency to forsake country life, exchanging it for a life in really overcrowded cities, is decried by many. But it seems to be an inevitable course. Dr. A. C. True, of the Department of Agriculture, stated some time ago that within the last twenty years "over two million men gave up farming to join the great army of toilers in the cities, because they were not needed on the farms any longer. With the help of improved machinery a small number of men can turn out a greater product to-day than a larger number of laborers could possibly secure in olden times." This is a "poser" for those benevolent persons whose favorite advice to the city unemployed is "Go into the country." But they are not needed there, says the expert; and he proves it by irrefutable argument of the effect of improved labor-saving devices. The immediate result of the introduction of labor- saving machinery is that a great many workers are deprived of their customary occupations. Although it is true that new industries are created and give em- ployment to many of those who were deprived of it, yet it appears indisputable that labor-saving machinery is bound to save the labor and make the laborer use- less for the time being. It saves the labor for the employer, and thereby it deprives of employment all those whose labor it has helped to save. A few ex- THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 121 amples will illustrate the correctness of this assertion. In a modern tannery, for instance, one can see a "putting out" machine, an ingenious contrivance which presses and scrapes the tanned hides at the rate of 350 dozens a day. It is attended by one man! According to M. G. Mulhall, one American "hand," with mechanical aid, produces as much grain as five European woricers. Also only four "hands" are needed for the production of grain sufficient to supply with flour one thousand persons for one year. Edward Atkinson states that the annual labor of only seven men i3 required for the production, trans- portation, baking and distribution of one thousand bar- rels of flour in the shape of bread sufficient for the nourishment of one thousand persons for a whole year. (The shade of Malthus must feel very uncom- fortable at hearing this.) That one operator in a cot- ton factory makes cloth sufficient for 250 persons; that in a woolen factory one workman produces enough goods to clothe 300 persons; in a boot and shoe fac- tory, enough to furnish one thousand men and women with footwear to last a whole year. The annual labor of only fifteen men is sufficient to supply one thousand persons with all the food, cloth- ing and footwear they may require. Obviously, 985 men out of each 1,000 will find it impossible to get a "job" in the mentioned industries. "They are not needed there." In the mining industry each and every pneumatic drill has replaced and thrown out of work one dozen 122 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, workmen. Twenty-five years ago two men were re- quired for operating an oil well; to-day sixty wells are operated simultaneously with the help of a surface rod, a pumping-jack and a gas engine, all of them manipulated by only six men. One hundred and four- teen workers were permanently deprived of their work. In the printing industry one modern newspaper press operated by five men only turns out printed mat- ter which would have required the combined labor of 2,500 printers on the old-fashioned Franklin press; 2,495 workers were thrown out of a job. In box-making a little girl tending a box-making machine turns out 12,000 berry baskets a day! All grown-up male workers have evidently been relegated into the ranks of the unemployed. On the average a private factory owner in America has at his command a power machinery of about 70 h. p., which produces as much as the labor of 700 men would have produced. Who can gainsay that it ''does save the labor," or rather the hire of labor, to each and every one of the owners of factories. Deducting a comparatively small outlay for hiring men, women and children (preferably children, on account of cheap- ness), for the operating and maintenance of that ma- chinery, — the entire product of these 700 dumb labor- ers goes to the owner as his "labor-saver" and net "profit." Meanwhile, what are the displaced 690 "liv- ing" laborers to do for their living? With the continuous and rapid advance of civiliza- tion the introduction of new and still more effective THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 123 labor-saving devices is bound to throw out of em- ployment thousands upon thousands of workmen, aug- menting the ranks of the unemployed to appalling pro- portions. INVENTIONS DO NOT BENEFIT MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE Does the wonderful progress in invention of new and improved machinery cause unemployment in America? As it is computed that one man does to- day, in effectiveness, the work of fifty men of half a century ago, the natural question arises, what shall the remaining forty-nine men do to earn their living? Even though new industries have since sprung into existence, giving employment to many, thousands are still unemployed; and with new inventions and im- provements in labor-saving machinery many more thousands are bound to be thrown out of employment. The facts prove that, instead of benefiting, the labor-saving machinery has wrought mischief in the world of labor. Surely the presence in our midst of a permanent and ever-increasing host of the unem- ployed clearly indicates that t!.a inventions of labor- saving machinery do not benefit the majority of our population. On the contrary, they drive many thou- sands of workmen into the desperate condition of "per- ishing for want of sustenance and employment" and of leading a life of poverty and misery "not to the honor of so bountiful a housekeeper as the Lord of Heaven and Earth is" ! 124 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, Yet, under ordinary conditions, the high state of technical knowledge and the resulting innumerable labor-saving devices should undoubtedly spread ease and comfort among the people, reducing want to a minimum ; should give the people leisure to enjoy life by shortening the hours of toil ; should enable all to freely and fully exercise their inalienable right to "life, liberty and pursuit of happiness." Why don't they do it? We shall see. MACHINES BENEFIT THEIR OWNERS A hard-working man was Robinson Crusoe prior to finding his labor-saving machine in the person of a submissive savage. "And first I let him know his name should be Friday," says Robinson in his diary. "I likewise taught him to call me 'master.' . . . Never man had a more faithful, loving servant than my man Friday was to me. ... I was greatly delighted with him, and made it my business to teach him everything that was proper to make him useful, handy and help- ful. ... I set him to work to beating corn out and sifting it in the manner I used to do, and in a little time my man Friday was able to do all the work for me. ... I began really to love the creature . . . and now my life was so easy that I cared not if I was never to remove from my island." This labor-saving machine had evidently saved, for its owner, "all the work" and made him perfectly comfortable and contented, and his life "so easy." THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 125 Anyon-^ who dwells in a well-furnished house, sup- plied with the latest improvements, is leading a life of comparative ease and comfort. He hardly requires the presence of a ''living help" ; he has numerous "in- animate" helpers in dumbwaiters, sewing machine, washing machine, appliances for cooking by gas or electricity, lighting, heating, telephones, hot and cold water, etc. All these real labor-saving devices are actually saving labor for their possessor, and they greatly alleviate for him the drudgery of housekeep- ing. But, in order to be benefited by them, one must either own them outright or at least be in a position to afford paying a consideration for their use. The former hardships of toil and long hours of the American farmer have been almost entirely relieved by the invention of such marvels as a steam plow, a reaping machine, a thresher and harvester, and many other ingenious devices in the line of agricultural pur- suit. But these machines are expensive, and only com- paratively few can afford to purchase and own them. Again, machinery is benefiting its owner or him who can afford to pay for its use. The same applies to any branch of industry. The following tradition exists in reference to the inven- tion of one of the first important improvements in the effectiveness of a steam engine, — a connecting belt. It is said that the invention was made and for the first time successfully applied by a small boy who, tired of turning by hand for many hours a day the wheel of a secondary machine, as was his duty to do, cleverly 126 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. connected his wheel by a piece of leather strop witH the large fly wheel of a near-by steam engine, and made the latter do his work. The results of this clever invention were : The owner of the factory was greatly benefited by the invention, and the boy — lost his job ! His services were, of course, "no longer required." Thus the "well-to-do" owners of houses with "mod- ern improvements," the owners of well-equipped farms and factories, are enjoying the benefits and profits from labor-saving inventions, while the propertyless laborer is only forced by them into the ranks of the twentieth century "miserables," — the unemployed. The very elements of nature, — water, steam, elec- tricity, and the air itself, — have been pressed into ser- vice to toil incessantly for their owners. Yes, "own- ers" is a proper word to apply in this connection. Be- cause water is of small commercial value unless an elaborate plant is owned, transforming it into a water- power; steam is useless if not utilized by complicated and expensive machinery; and electricity is only a source of danger unless subdued, concentrated and rendered highly efifective by expensive plants, each of which costs a small fortune. Hundreds of thousands of dollars are often required for the equipment of one of these devices designed for the capture and subju- gation of nature's elements. Once harnessed, however, they respond nobly by performing wonders, benefiting indirectly the people at large, but directly, and too often exclusively, their owners. The said "owners" are, as a rule, multimillionaires THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 127 who cannot help becoming all-powerful monopolists. Yet if but for such wholesale monopolization of most of the labor-saving machines, — and even elements of nature, — the American people would have been really prosperous and the army of the unemployed would certainly be heard of no longer in the domain of ''so bountiful a housekeeper as the Lord of Heaven and Earth is." MONOPOLIZED MACHINERY IS HARMING THE PEOPLE While a comparatively insignificant portion of the population of this country owns, possesses and derives direct benefits and pecuniary profits from labor-saving machinery, the great majority of the American people, being wholly deprived of any participation in the profits from industries, and having nothing but their personal services to rely on for the gaining of their livelihood, — are driven, owing to the introduction of new and still more expensive machinery, into the dis- mal stages of semi-employment, unemployment and utter destitution. Indeed, if one thousand persons are supplied with necessary footwear by the labor of one cobbler in a shoe factory, and with clothing and food by the labor of only fourteen workmen, then it is self-evident that a great many cobblers, operatives and food producers are of necessity finding that "their services are not required." 128 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. It is also evident that, with still greater improve- ments in machinery, a smaller and smaller numbe^ of laborers will be required. How can then the unem- ployed earn their living? And, if they are not able to earn it by their "labor," then what is to become of them? Are they superfluous on this planet? It is a frightful condition; a condition savoring of the dark ages, of barbarism. Millions of human beings, owing to the monopolization of labor-saving machinery by a few "specially privileged," are artificially "over- crowded." It is plain, of course, that civilization and progress have nothing to do with this "artificial overcrowding." The labor-saving machines, being instrumental in pro- ducing great wealth, are meant to be a blessing to mankind. But they are turned into a scourge by a hoggish monopolization of them by the few and the complete exclusion of the many. UNEMPLOYMENT MUST INCREASE ENORMOUSLY There is hardly any room for doubt that in America, as well as anywhere else where monopoly is on the increase, the number of the unemployed must also proportionately increase, until a stage is reached which is so frightfully illustrated in the examples of China and the East Indies. When machinery is so improved that the entire work in a factory will consist of the turning of a (THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 129 handle of some giant machine, a little girl is likely to be hired to do the turning for about $3 a week. The "owner" will then pocket all the immense profits from this universal labor-saving machine, and the rest of the people will be thrown out of employment for good, their services will be obviously "not wanted." The case is extreme, but it serves the purpose of an illustration. The tendency of improvements in ma- chinery is to require fewer and fewer workmen to do the work; otherwise their appellation, "labor-saving," is a misnomer. It also forcibly demonstrates the fearful prospect in store for millions of Americans unless we clearly real- ize the INADEQUACY OF THE SYSTEM OF WAGE-WORKING. Wages alone are evidently in- sufficient. THE PEOPLE MUST HAVE A SHARE IN THE PROFITS DERIVED FROM THE USE OF THE LABOR-SAVING MACHINERY, for, as indicated above, a time may come when the only re- maining wage-worker will be that little girl at $3 per week ! From the foregoing there is but one strictly logical conclusion: Unlimited ownership by private individ- uals of great labor-saving devices and machines is a gross injustice to the people and is, therefore, rightly resented by them. Monopolization of the labor-saving machinery being harmful, they must be reclaimed by the people, and owned by the people and for the people. But government ownership, advocated by the Socialists, is not the only way to achieve the desired 130 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, result. It may, perhaps, become a fact at some dis- tant day. Meanwhile, the proposed law of limited ownership is a practical step in the right direction. It is bound to bring the ownership, and the consequent profit-taking, derived from the labor-saving machines to very large groups of men, such groups as the mu- tual insurance companies, building and loan associa- tions, etc., consist of at the present time. In such mutual companies millions of persons, — as will be shown in the next chapter, — have been using to mu- tual advantage the labor-saving devices for a great many years, and have been deriving from them mu- tually all the benefits and all the profits. Shall we continue looking languidly and indolently at the rapid growth of private monopoly and at the constantly increasing misery of the countless semi- employed, unemployed, and even starving Americans, while the Socialists are also dreaming a dream or are advocating confiscation, a revolution, etc. ; or shall we enact a practical Law of Limited Ownership that is destined to harm no one and benefit everyone? Which shall it be? But perhaps there is some other remedy for this dangerous condition of unemployment? Let us take a parting glance at what the wise men of different nations have had to say upon the subject, and what lessons have been given us in this respect by the his- tory of mankind. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 131 ROCKEFELLER'S REMEDY FOR UNEM- PLOYMENT "A laborer is worthy of his hire; no less and no more," says John D. Rockefeller. "He must in the long run contribute an equivalent for what he is paid. If he does not do this he is probably pauperized and you at once throw out the balance of things/' What sublime philosophy! Coming from such a source, this serenely calm and eminently cold-blooded exposition of the dread problem of unemployment is very interesting and highly instructive. The vener- able Father of Trusts evidently takes for granted that the laborer who finds himself in the ranks of the un- employed is merely unworthy of his hire, owing to his laziness, presumably, to bad habits, morals, etc., or, perhaps, because he is stupid, unruly or in some other way unfit for the performance of the duties stipulated in that hire. Such may be the case in a few excep- tional instances. As a rule, however, the implied low standard of morality and intelligence cannot possibly be applied to millions of unemployed or partly em- ployed Americans. With due respect to Mr. Rockefeller, we are com- pelled to reject his offhand theory and solution of the vexatious problem of unemployment. It is too shal- low; the cause lies much deeper. It has been con- clusively proven by official statistics that good or bad habits, fitness or unfitness of American workmen, have 132 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. nothing to do with their inability to get employment. THERE IS NO EMPLOYMENT TO BE HAD, no matter how "worthy of their hire" the American work- ers may be. NAPOLEONIC SOLUTION OF THE PROBLEM OF UNEMPLOYMENT History demonstrates that in France, before the Revolution, the best land was monopolized by the clergy and nobility, who successfully appropriated, as their "private" property, about three-fifths of their country. The property of the clergy alone was esti- mated at a billion of dollars, — immense wealth for those times. The King of France and his satellites, the nobles, had the remainder of the good things, while twenty-eight million of French people had to be contented with what was left for them, — the poorest land, and mighty little of that. Both clergy and nobility were (mark this!) exempt from taxation! They did not even have to "swear off" their taxes, as does the American "nobility." Under such monstrous distributions of wealth (which, by the bye, markedly resembles our own) there naturally were countless hosts of the "unem- ployed." When the people could stand it no longer they rose and put to the sword both the king and the nobility. But the question of filling the stomachs of the now free yet hungry citizens became the grave problem of the hour. It soon reached such an acute ,THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 133 stage tha£ all the leaders and officials of the newly born Republic lost their heads, both metaphorically and literally. Then the situation became so unbear- able that the time was ripe for the genius of Napoleon to come to the rescue. He speedily organized the hungry citizens into invincible armies, and marched them off to conquer their neighbors, and, incidentally, to fill their stomachs at their neighbors' expense. In the common parlance of Wall Street, "he opened for- eign markets" for his fellow-citizens. The Napoleonic solution of the question of unem- ployment worked like a charm. When he was through with his conquests hundreds of thousands of the for- merly unemployed found lasting "employment" by leaving this world forever. Mr. Rockefeller's calm remedy had thus a practical application: they were "thrown out as the balance of things." DEMAND FOR BREAD AND GAMES BY ROMAN UNEMPLOYED Looking further back into the history of mankind, we find that in 100 B.C. the enormous concentration of wealth in the possession of a few, and especially the immense landed estates of the Roman nobility, had impoverished the great Roman Empire to such an extent that, out of a population of one million and a half, only two thousand citizens held any property, while the remainder became the "unemployed" of the period. The same cause produces the same result everywhere and at all times. 134 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. Unlike the American unemployed, who humbly pe- tition for an opportunity to work, their Roman pre- decessors were quite arrogant, auu imperiously de- manded "Bread and Games." They were so menacing that the inimitable Nero and other "masters" of the tottering empire were compelled to furnish "artificial employment" for many thousands by causing to be erected (at public expense) various fine buildings, via- ducts, etc., and in addition thereto they had to feed multitudes by a free distribution of corn bread, and to entertain them, for several weeks at a time, in immense amphitheaters (one of them, the Colliseum, had a sitting capacity of 100,000) with gladiatorial fights, massacres of Christians, and other equally re- fined pastimes. In spite of such endeavors the Roman unemployed naturally grew more and more numerous, until the sturdy barbarians from the north easily conquered the impoverished weaklings and put most of them to the sword. Thus again a drastic measure was applied for the speedy solution of the ever-recurring problem of unemployment, and it was in strict keeping with the recommendations and practice of both Mr. Rocke- feller and the great Napoleon! EGYPTIAN PYRAMID BUILDERS Should we penetrate into antiquity as far back as 4000 B.C., to the time when the Egyptian Pharaohs held, by virtue of the right divine, the whole Egyptian THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 135 land as their own "private property" and were bestow- ing large slices thereof upon their props, the priests and the warriors, while the "common" people held their land on leases only, — even then the everlasting problem of unemployment was in evidence as plainly as it is observed to-day on Cherry Hill, New York, or Whitechapel, London, or in any other of its mod- ern strongholds. The wonderful pyramids are grand monuments to the Egyptian method of solving the question of unem- ployment. Hundreds of thousands of troublesome and idle human beings, including the kinsmen of Joseph, son of Jacob, were kept from mischief for a great many years by being forced to rear up, under the pitiless lash of the overseers, the stupendous edifices designed for the final reception of a mummy of their "owner" and ruler. True, the wretched pyramid build- ers, unlike the modern "beggars for work," were out- right slaves and were chastised with a lash. Yet, on the other hand, they were housed, clothed and fed at the public expense — a consideration not shown to the modern unemployed, unless when admitted to a poorhouse or jail! SUMMARY OF THE CAUSES AND REMEDY Summarizing we find that the condition of unem- ployment is nonexistent among animals and savages; that it appears on the scene simultaneously with the birth of "capitalism," when Employer and Help, as 136 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. unnatural twins, make their initial bow, and then grow in an inverted ratio: the fatter the employer, the leaner the help. We have observed that overcrowding cannot be the cause of unemployment in a country with scarcely twenty persons to a square mile; that the Malthusian theory is a huge joke, whereas the United States alone can support more than a billion people; that the his- tory of mankind shows the presence of unemployment and poverty of the majority of the population when- ever and wherever the wealth of a nation became con- centrated, and consequently monopolized, in the pos- session of a few persons ; that such a condition ex- isted, particularly in England, at the time when the Pilgrim Fathers emigrated to the New World, and in France just prior to the Revolution ; in Rome, pre- ceding its fall; and in Egypt during the pyramid- building period, in 4000 B.C. We have found that labor-saving devices and ma- chinery, designed to be of inestimable value and bene- fit to mankind, having been monopolized by a few, are reaping for their "owners" immense profits, at the same time driving the impecunious workers out of employment, at first temporarily and then perma- nently; that these valuable labor-saving devices, al- though constituting the most important part of the national wealth, became undoubtedly the absolute ^'private property" of a very few persons. We have seen that about a hundred years ago, upon the testimony of La Fayette, our country was con- THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 137 spicuous by the total absence of the unemployed poor; and we know, from sad experience, that it is teeming to-day with many signs of indigence; that it perma- nently contains a standing army of over fifty thousand tramps and a million or more of unemployed ; and we have seen that a large army of the unemployed was always formed at a time when the wealth of a nation had become monopolized, as the "private property" of the few, be it in Egypt, Rome, France or America. We found that the vexing question of unemploy- ment, in spite of Mr. Rockefeller's assertion, is not caused by unfitness or the low morality of workers; and especially such causes cannot be applied in the United States, where the partly employed and totally unemployed workers cannot be accused of possessing such disqualifications. We found that the same cause produced the same results, whether in a Divine Right country, in 4000 B.C., or in a Vested Right country, in 1913 A.D. And, as for the Remedy, we had to reject Mr. Rockefeller's calm recommendation of simply "throwing out as the balance of things" all the unemployed, as well as the drastic measures of Napoleon and the northern bar- barians of putting to the sword the "miserables" of the world. What is the remedy, then? Obviously, the Remedy must remove the cause, — the abnormal concentration and monopolization of the national wealth. The Law of Limited Ownership is designed to do this, and therefore it is the only effec- tive remedy for the mortal disease of unemployment. 138 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. , CHAPTER VI Nature's Universal Law of Limitation Looking around us, we can easily discern the mani- festations of an important law of nature which may- be called the Law of Limitation. The Maker of this planet decreed, with inscrutable wisdom and fore- sight, that there should be a limit to all things, ma- terial and spiritual. The earth, though abounding in an infinite variety of objects, contains nothing that is unlimited. Everything has its limit, either in extent or capacity. There are high, snow-capped mountains and deep, precipice-like canyons; mighty rivers and little brooks; majestic cedars and modest violets; fero- cious lions and meek lambs. But we would search in vain for anything that is unlimited: Ogres, Cyclops and other monsters exist in fairy tales only. Light has its limit in darkness, and day in night; life in death and death in resurrection, which is new life. Limitations are everywhere, on every side. Among men some are seven feet in height, others barely five ; no one is known to reach the height of a mile. Some weigh three hundred pounds; others one hundred; no one weighs a ton. Some have large heads, others small; no one has a head as large as a mountain or as small as a pin head. In the same way our capaci- ties and defects, virtues and vices, talents and short- comings are strictly limited by the same universal law. In short, everything invariably submits to the iTHE AMERICAN PEOPLE 139 mandates of this immutable law of nature, and '^ governed correspondingly through its whole period of existence. HARMONY OF THE WHOLE IS ULTIMATE AIM OF EVERYTHING As regards the reason why there should be a limit to everything, and as to the means for determining the desirable extent of such a limit, — these questions can be answered best by a deduction from the facts under observation. First, in extent and capacity, everything is limited to its highest state of efficiency and usefulness, and second, — the parts are subservient to the whole, with the ultimate aim in view, the har- mony of the whole. Taking, for instance, the seasons of the year, we observe that in the morning of life the buds begin to develop, the balmy air and sunshine of spring are doing their utmost to aid the budding life in its struggle for existence. The sun rays are not then so strong as to endanger the best possible development of the new life. In summer, however, when adoles- cent youth merges into maturity, the sun sends his rays with the greatest vigor. Then, life having ma- tured, mild and mellow autumn appears on the scene. It renders, in its turn, valuable help to the utmost efficiency and usefulness of all things. With its oblique and soft sunshine it assists nature in garner- ing its harvest, in making provision for the future and (140 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, in laying the foundation for the regeneration of life. Finally the labors of nature terminate, for the time being, and it stands in need of complete rest. Then the night of life, winter, puts an efficient stop to the sources of life: activities of various faculties cease and are enveloped in restful slumber. The next spring awakens them to new life. The harmony of the whole is always the aim of the activities of all parts. There can never be any per- manent discord in nature. Earthquakes, tornadoes, etc., may temporarily disarrange harmony, but it is speedily restored by the recuperative powers of na- ture, and life goes on smoothly, all things doing their best, and not transgressing beyond the limits of their greatest usefulness. A unit is always conforming it- self to the needs of the total ; the parts to the whole ; and the Hmitations imposed upon them are such as to produce that exquisite harmony of the whole which is observed everywhere in nature to the everlasting glory of the Creator. LAW OF LIMITATION EXEMPLIFIED IN HUMAN BODY The human body presents an excellent example illustrating the wonderful workings of the law of limitation. Every part of the human body, no matter how small and apparently unimportant, receives from the common fund an amount of nourishment exactly sufficient for the proper performance of its duties, for THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 141 its perfect well-being; neither more nor less. In this manner the humblest organ of the body receives com- fortable living wages, — so to speak, — on which it is enabled to do its very best and thrive. Such wages, in life blood, are ceaselessly produced by those inde- fatigable workers, the organs of digestion, and con- tinually distributed by the no less faithful workers, the heart and the lungs, with the assistance of innumer- able arteries and veins. The latter, by means of a marvelous network of capillaries, are incessantly send- ing the precious life-giving fluid to the remotest parts of the body, in response to the demand for the same created by the work of said parts. The activities of various organs of the body are regulated, partly consciously, partly automatically, by the lofty intellect, emanating from the brain. Thus the whole remarkable system receives its commands from and is under the supreme guidance of the human brain, which, ably assisted by local nerve centers and the whole nervous system, is truly the Chief Execu- tive of the Law of Limitation in this instance. By the direction of the brain the precepts of that law are minutely carried out. Nothing oversteps the prescribed limits necessary for the attainment of the highest efficiency and usefulness; the life blood is equitably distributed to all parts; and the welfare of the whole, — of the parts as well as of the body, — is always maintained. As a result, the wealth of the body, consisting mainly of its blood, is mutually owned, so to speak, on a limited shareholding plan, 142 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, and distributed so equitably that no one part receives "too much," no one "too little," and all have "enough." Such is the condition of the human body, while in perfect health. The precepts of the Law of Limita- tion are strictly obeyed : harmony is the aim and dis- cord is the penalty for infraction of this law. Man can do no better than bow with humility, and be edified by the perfect workings of this supreme law of nature. By carefully noting its ways he should en- deavor to intelligently apply them to his own imper- fect creation, — the artificial body of men called "so- ciety." LIMITED OWNERSHIP PRESERVED IN A FAMILY Turning our attention to the construction and opera- tions of society, we find that in any well-balanced fam- ily nature's law of limitation is instinctively enforced, and therefore perfect harmony is in evidence. The worldly possessions belong mutually to all, as well as to individuals, and are used, first, for the benefit of all, and then for the benefit of each and every member in proportion to his needs. No member, however clever, is allowed to appropriate an unlimited share of the common wealth; for it is clearly realized that such an appropriation would militate against the wel- fare of all. The selfish greed of individuals is not only frowned upon, but effectually curbed, as it should be. Consequently the equitable distribution of wealth, THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 143 that will o' the wisp of mankind, is in operation in the domain of a family : no one having too much, all hav- ing enough. It should also be noted that all members of a fam- ily are enjoying equal opportunities, — another seem- ingly unattainable desideratum of mankind. The for- cible encroachments of the stronger upon the rights of the weaker are guarded against ; the material well- being of all is looked after; and the intellectual and moral development of each member is taken care of. All are given an equal opportunity requisite for their enlightenment and refinement; they can blame no one but themselves should they fail to profit by the oppor- tunities offered them. Thus the average American family presents all the elements which make life worth living. An equitable distribution of wealth ; equal rights to all, special privi- leges to none; and equality of opportunity are all no mere catch words, but real and substantial facts. A family is the embryo of a true democratic republic. It certainly contains all the requisites for the perfect welfare of its members. In good times every member shares in the mutual prosperity; in adversity, all feel the strain. Owing to a full application of the prin- ciple of limited ownership, it is impossible for a fam- ily to present the dismal picture of two or three of its members rolling in wealth, while the rest are ever- lastingly struggling with poverty. Oh, what a pity that, as soon as an individual leaves the environment of his family and launches on the (144 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, troubled sea of society, he finds himself surrounded by inimical and treacherous forces, which he must com- bat, lest he be overwhelmed and sink to the bottom a mauigled wreck! BENEFICIAL HOMESTEAD ACT At one stage of their history the American people appeared as though they were one large family. It was at the time when they were confronted with the grave land-ownership problem. They solved it to the satisfaction of all. Having come into the possession of this broad land, they adopted a wise and just policy, expressed in the Homestead Act, by which they made evident their preference for the advisability and justice of parceling their common property in land in accordance with the only true ideal of a democratic republic, — the principle of limited individual ownership. They did not allow the fleetest and the strongest to rush and take forcible possession of all the available land. They strictly forbade that kind of licentious proceeding. Instead, they permitted the bonafide set- tler to become the actual tiller of the soil and to select, cultivate, and eventually own a homestead built upon a small but sufficient number of acres of public land. Beneficial results of this broad-minded and judi- cious legislation are manifest to this day. The coun- try presents a robust republic honeycombed with mil- lions of homesteads of small farm owners, who are. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 145 in fact, limited shareholders of the national landed wealth. The prosperity and thrift based upon so solid a foundation are such that even at the present time, notwithstanding the vigorous efforts of powerful mo- nopolists to deprive them of their legitimate profits, American farmers are, as yet, the backbone of the nation, its firmest stronghold ! INDUSTRIAL POLICY OF GO-AS-YOU-PLEASE It is unfortunate that when our industries began to grow apace with the prosperity of the people, and then far ahead of it ; when coal, oil, copper, steel, and other valuable products of our soil were discovered; when the land began to be covered with a network of those social arteries, railways; and when numerous factories opened their activities — our statesmen and legislators did not rise to the occasion, but remained merely passive onlookers. An industrial policy of go- as-you-please was silently promulgated. They allowed the industrial wealth of the country, — unlike its landed wealth, — to flow and settle into any private channels it might chance to encounter. Owing to this short-sighted and injudicious policy of "non-interference," the strongest and the quickest, and the least scrupulous, rushed to the front, — this time unimpeded, — and took firm possession of all the industries in sight. Meanwhile a multitude of would- be industrial homesteaders was left behind unprovided and forsaken. Thus all the oil of this nation speedily became the private property of one puissant family ; all 146 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. the beef of another; all the sugar of a third; and so on to the end of the industrial line. It was quite natural for the industrial squatters to avail themselves of the special privilege granted to them, and appropriate, for their own exclusive benefit and profit, everything worth appropriation. It is almost inconceivable how the American people and their statesmen and legislators could display such simplicity of mind as not to understand that there is no substantial difference between the landed posses- sions of a people and their industrial wealth. True, the first consists of an immovable and easily measur- able land itself. But the second is nothing else but the produce of that land. And certainly both are the indisputable property of the people, and should be used in strict conformity with the mandate of the principle, "The greatest good for the greatest num- ber." As the American people did not choose to give away to a few persons their whole landed property, then the question arises — was there any sound reason why they should have tendered to a few monopolists, as a free gift, their entire industrial wealth? As it was deemed just and advisable to let every citizen have a chance in sharing the national landed wealth, why is such a sharing in the nation's indus- trial wealth denied to the majority of the American people? Surely such a policy is unjust and harmful in the extreme ! THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 147 LIMITED BUSINESS OWNERSHIP— INDUS- TRIAL HOMESTEAD ACT Let us imagine that we were not enveloped in eco- nomic slumber at the time when the development of our great industries began taking place, and when the promoters of various large corporations and un- dertakings had applied to us for permission to organ- ize for business and to issue their stocks, bonds, etc. Let us suppose that, instead of having passively al- lowed them the privilege to do and take anything they pleased, we had given them only a qualified permit, as follows: ''The American people grant you the privilege to organize, appropriate, develop and profit by your particular industry, upon condition that no one is allowed to hold shares in excess of $250,000." Had a law to this effect been at that time placed on our statute books, the Homestead Act of Industries would have been enacted. The strongest and the greediest would not have free play; the weaker and less talented would have been protected and given an opportunity; the number of small shareholders would have by this time reached into hundreds of thousands, or even millions; a mil- lionaire shareholder, — the soul of private monopoly, — would have become extinct; consequently, our great national industries would not have been (as they un- fortunately are) the personal property of a few indus- trial magnates; but would have become the property 148 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. and pride of millions of small shareholders, of the people, just as our land is the property and pride of millions of small homesteaders. These conclusions are arrived at by tracing the ef- fect to its cause. As certainly as unlimited private ownership does to-day, and ever will, degenerate into private monopoly, — limited shareholding does to-day (as we shall show later) and always will bring forth the mutual ownership of large industrial undertak- ings and genuine profit-sharing for millions of people. Unfortunately, the American people, having permit- ted the entire supply of their country's oil, beef, sugar, coffee, etc., to become the private property of a few individuals, did not cover themselves with glory. They have given away their birthright for a pitiful "mess of potage." As the result of such a give-away policy, the state of affairs in the industrial world of the present day is unnatural: a few have too much, while the ma- jority have not enough. The precepts of nature's law of limitation have been disregarded, and even reversed : UNITS HAVE BECOME MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE WHOLE. Consequently the harmony of the whole has been turned into a huge discord, which it is our misfortune to witness to-day. Equitable distribution of wealth has become a dead letter; equal rights to all, special privileges to none, — a mockery; and equality of opportunity, — an insult to the intelligence of the American people! [THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 149 CHAPTER VII Limited Private Ownership — the Remedy *'The supreme object to be attained is that the people of the country be brought back into the ownership of the corporate property of the country. . . . An ownership so indi- vidualized that it can be said at last that all the property of the country belongs to the people." — Judge P. S. Grosscup, in "Who Shall Own America." While we all agree upon the desirability of the equitable distribution of wealth, most of us are only wistfully longing for it, doing nothing toward its achievement; others believe the equitable distribution to be an unattainable myth, and still others, — tariff re- formers, single-taxers, socialists, cooperationists, and those who believe in profit-sharing, — are striving for its attainment by means which appeal to them as most applicable. The ranks of the latter have been aug- mented of late by those who believe, with the author, that the widespread adoption of the principle of limited ownership of private property will make profit-sharing and equitable distribution a fact and will force pov- erty — that dread offspring of the inequitable distribu- tion of wealth, — to disappear from the face of the earth. ISO KINGS OF WEALTH VS. LIMITED OWNERSHIP IN SAVINGS BANKS Limited private ownership of business enterprises, with Hmited shareholding as its expression, is not a fancy; it is a reality which is met every day. Furthermore, it is not in its experimental stage, either. It has been found in every respect satisfactory after a thorough trial of many years. The American savings banks are fair exponents of the benefits of the principle of limited ownership ap- plied to business. No one depositor may deposit more than the maximum of $3,000. The profits of these banks belong to all depositors and are distributed among them in proportion to their deposits at stated periods. Being mutual and not private institutions, these banks are under very strict supervision. While private banks may be drawn into wild-cat schemes and finan- cial jugglery, savings banks stand aloof, dignified and above suspicion. Their owners, the people, have en- joined the apostles of high finance to keep their hands off the savings of the people. This explains the fact of their healthy growth and unquestionable popularity. There are seventeen hundred savings banks in this country, with the combined assets reaching the vast figure of four billion dollars. Almost ten million de- posits are made yearly, and the profits, amounting to a hundred and fifty millions a year, are distributed among millions of depositors. It is a genuine equitable distribution of profits ! JHE AMERICAN PEOPLE 151 LIMITED OWNERSHIP IN BUILDING AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS Another example of the business enterprises of the people, conducted by the people and for the people, and on a limited ownership plan, is presented by the thoroughly American building and loan associations. This branch of the industrial activities of the people has also completely escaped being subjugated by in- dustrial giants. Many attempts have been made by some clever financiers to assume the guise of these mutual associations, to carry off their patronage and pocket the profits. But the people would not be de- ceived. They have faithfully stood by their own well- tried institutions, flatly refused to give the designing financiers the coveted patronage, and by so doing they have driven the suave impostors out of business. The organization and business transactions of these associations are well known. A group of persons jointly own in them a small capital which is either lent or borrowed, as occasion may arise, but always between members only, "mutually," and chiefly for the purpose of home-building. Every member de- rives equal benefits and draws, in proportion to his or her shareholding, the entire profits from each and every transaction of the association. Limited ownership is embodied in their invariable rule forbidding anyone to hold more than twenty-five shares valued at $5,000. This limit is occasionally raised to $10,000. 152 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. The independence and success of the building and loan associations is largely attributable to their ad- herence to the principles of mutuality and limited ownership. There is no room for doubt that, were their shareholding unlimited, they would have long ago become a huge monopoly, absorbed by some clever captain of industry, for his own "personal" benefit and profit. But, ensconced behind the sound principle of mutuality, these associations remain independent pub- lic property. In every town and village, in fact all over the land, thousands upon thousands of homes of persons in moderate circumstances are mutely yet eloquently testifying to the benefits accrued to the people through the ministry of these associations. It is safe to assume that the majority of these homes would have never been built but for the valuable help ren- dered by these fair exponents of the principle of lim- ited ownership. There are in the United States, at the present time, over 6,000 purely mutual building and loan associ- ations, whose membership has reached 2,300,000. During the past year the members have borrowed on mortgages upward of $283,000,000, and on their passbooks, as temporary loans, $20,000,000. The weekly dues and deposits of members amount to over $280,000,000, and the total assets of all associations combined to $1,000,000,000. These data are taken from the latest available re- port of the United States League of the Local Build- THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 153 ing and Loan Associations. The league has been formed for the purpose of caring for interests com- mon to all local associations, and proved particularly useful in warding off the attempts of financial cap- tains of industries to monopolize the business of these associations. Perhaps the day is not far distant when the Ameri- can people will own and manage all their industries in the same way as they do in these associations, and will have central leagues to look after the common interests of local groups! MUTUAL BENEFIT ORGANIZATIONS American fraternal organizations, though not in a class of profit-bringing enterprises, are admirable il- lustrations of the popularity among Americans of the principle of independent mutuality and limited share- holding. They demonstrate the fact that the Ameri- can people are alive to the possibilities of conducting business themselves, without necessarily being bossed by some financial genius, or by a paternal socialistic government, for that matter. The business part of the activities of these associa- tions is not inconsiderable. During the past year their active membership has reached, in America, 11,720,215. Their foremost representative, the Royal Arcanum, has met the contingencies of many deaths and paid over $127,500,000 to the beneficiaries of deceased mem- bers. Various other orders and societies have done 154 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. splendid work as regards mutual relief in time of need, and all of them may be considered as efficient training schools for the principle of mutuality, with the people as scholars, well-nigh graduated after many years of practical work. GIANT COMPANIES ON BASIS OF LIMITED SHAREHOLDING It may be said that the examples quoted refer only to business enterprises conducted on a small scale, and that the basis of limited shareholding cannot be applied with success to enterprises on a large scale. We shall presently see that several gigantic enter- prises, handling billions of the people's money, are conducted on the same principle and with great suc- cess. The enterprises in question are the giant mu- tual insurance companies. For the purposes of illus- trating them we shall take a look at the status and workings of the foremost among them. As far back as in 1841 an American mutual insur- ance company was organized, and assumed the name of Nylic. The present name of the company, for obvious reasons, need not be disclosed; suffice it to say that the company does business under the char- ter granted to it by the State of New York, and all the figures quoted herein are taken from the latest report of the Superintendent of Insurance of that State. The Nylic has adopted, as its principle, the mutual- THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 155 ity of a family, as its emblem the picture of an eagle feeding its young, and as its business creed the motto, "mutual benefits to all, partiality to none," the motto of all really mutual organizations. The Nylic has steadfastly adhered to these honorable principles for over 70 years, and is faithful to them to this day. The founders of the Nylic wisely decided to es- tablish a limit to the shareholding of the company to $100,000. That is, no one person may become a member holding a policy on his life for an amount larger than $100,000. A $300,000 policy may be issued in exceptional cases, and, if a larger amount of insur- ance is granted to an individual, the risk must be re- insured in other companies for the excess of the com- pany's maximum limit. Thus the company's liability does not exceed the prescribed limit in any individual case. To this principle of limitation the company un- doubtedly owes its complete independence, popular- ity and great success. As a result of the limitation of shareholding, the Nylic is the absolute property of over one million small depositors, who are, in proportion to the amount of their deposits, its owners, rulers and chief bene- ficiaries. In that capacity they receive all the benefits and all the profits which are derived from the com- pany's "mutual" business. Is it not an ideal method of ownership for our busi- ness enterprises conducted on a large scale? 156 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. LARGE ENTERPRISES WITHOUT AID OF MILLIONAIRE SHAREHOLDERS Without the aid of any millionaire shareholder the Nylic has become one of the greatest fiduciary insti- tutions of the world. Its example has conclusively refuted the contention that we stand in urgent need of millionaires and their "private" fortunes for the successful conduct of our large enterprises. In its assets the Nylic has immense wealth, con- sisting mostly of real estate, government and railroad bonds, and other safe securities, to the total amount of $705,000,000! This enormous wealth is restrained from outside interference by rigid regulations, and in consequence of such prudent policy is securely re- posing in the company's safety vaults, while the cus- todians may be interpreted as saying to the anxious devotees of high finance: "Hands off, please. This is the property of the American people." The Nylic has all over the world numerous branches and offices. Its magnificent twelve stories' high home office, in the city of New York, is built throughout of white marble, mahogany and oak, and is valued at five millions of dollars. As many as ten thousand persons are daily visiting this office of the Nylic on business. For their accommodation, and for the bene- fit of over one thousand employees, the building con- tains 19 elevators, 470 telephones, 2,900 feet of pneu- matic tubing, an electric plant, a large printing office THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 157 (occupying four floors), and its own post-office, which handles daily over nine thousand parcels of mail. This beehive of industry is a substantial monument to the popularity of the Nylic and to the absolute soundness and practicability of the principles of mutuality and limited shareholding, upon which it has been reared. The actual rulers of the company are the twenty- four elective trustees, — men of the highest standing in the community, who are managing the affairs of the compan}'' through their committees and sub-com- mittees, which hold, on the average, eight hundred meetings a year. The trustees draw no salaries, re- ceiving only a nominal compensation for actual at- tendance at the meetings. The president of the company is elected by the trustees to serve one year only, at a salary of $50,000. Other executive officers, elected also for one year only, are receiving for their services ample but not too- excessive remunerations of from ten to thirty-five thousand dollars per annum. It is noteworthy that, although the officers have no other inducements aside from their salaries, the Nylic has grown great exclusively owing to their untiring efforts in its behalf. It has had a succession of emi- nently capable, upright and efficient presidents and their associates who have rendered highly creditable services. This fact of having in our midst thoroughly effi- cient captains of industry, whose ambition is suffi- ciently spurred and energy amply remunerated by a 158 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. comparatively small compensation, — demonstrates be- yond doubt the advisability of dispensing with the services of the extra-expensive captains of other Ameridan industries. The Nylic has conclusively proved that we can easily secure the services of men as capable as Carnegies and Rockefellers, at $25,000 or $50,000, instead of $25,000,000 or $50,000,000 per an- num. A comparison in favor of the Nylic's method, proving that its capable managers are ONE THOU- SAND TIMES less expensive than the aforesaid gen- tlemen, who imagine themselves, very likely sincerely, as indispensable captains of American industries. Generals and admirals we need and will always have; kings and barons we do not need, and shall soon dis- pense with their services. True to its traditions, the American nation, having rejected a political kingdom, will not tolerate much longer an industrial kingdom. Until the Nylic opened our eyes we had no clear understanding of the case, and, consequently, bowed to the apparent necessity of calling upon the services of the unreasonably expensive Fricks, Schwabs, and others; now, however, since all mutual and limited- ownership corporations, similar to the Nylic, have proved the practicability and great economy in en- gaging more reasonable managers for our industries, it would have been indeed unwise not to profit by their experience. JHE AMERICAN PEOPLE 159 NYLIC VERSUS STANDARD OIL It is interesting to match the champion of limited mutual ownership against the champion of monopo- lies and trusts. The Nylic is equaled by the Standard Oil in the magnitude of its transactions. But there is an im- mense difference between them as regards the bene- fits derived from them by the American people. One is the mutual property of a million persons ; the other the private property of an insignificant cluster of im- mensely rich individuals. A million owners of the Nylic are receiving yearly upward of fifty millions of dollars in benefits and profits; the millionaire owners of the Standard Oil, scarcely a thousand in number, are distributing "be- tween themselves" an equally large amount of profits derived from this nation's oil industry. On one side a million families are benefited by shar- ing the profits of part of an insurance industry of the nation; on the other, an infinitesimal portion of the population, possessing already fabulous fortunes, are drawing for their own exclusive benefit the total profits from the entire oil industry of the country. At least five million persons are benefited by the Nylic; five thousand only, — if that many, — are the direct profit-gatherers of the Standard Oil. Here we meet again with a ratio of ONE THOUSAND TO ONE in favor of the Nylic. In other words, the Nylic i6o KINGS OF WEALTH VS, is one thousand times more beneficial for the Amer- ican people than the Standard Oil. In this comparison the most prominent feature only was taken into consideration, — the pecuniary profits. Had we compared in detail the clean business meth- ods of the Nylic with the unsavory tactics of the Stan- dard Oil, — its clandestine meetings, railroad rebating, corruption of officials, spying upon and mercilessly crushing competitors, arbitrary ''fixing" of the prices, etc., — we should then have been compelled to admit that the Nylic is MANY THOUSAND TIMES more acceptable than the Standard Oil. More than a score of corporations engaged in the same line of business as the Nylic, and managing their affairs upon the same principles of mutuality and limited shareholders, are highly beneficial for more than twenty-five millions of people all over the world. The combined assets of these twenty-seven American mutual insurance companies have passed the enormous sum of three billions of dollars! Limited individual shareholding always results in widespread public profit-sharing; while unlimited in- dividual shareholding is bound to result in the estab- lishment of a private monopoly and in the exclusion of the public from the profit-sharing. Thus enterprises on a large scale may be, — as some of them are at the present time, — successfully con- ducted on a mutual and limited shareholding basis. Consequently there is no business, however large and important, which the American people could not man- THE AMERICAN PEOPLE i6i age themselves, for their own benefit and profit. There is no sound reason why they should not adhere to these wholesome principles, and thereby put a stop to the utterly objectionable unlimited shareholding and its baneful offspring, — private monopoly and trusts. LIMITED OWNERSHIP VS. PRIVATE MONOPOLY The following facts observed in the sphere of limited shareholding in the corporations quoted above illus- trate a few of the chief advantages to be derived by the people at large from this form of ownership as compared with the corresponding disadvantages from the form of unlimited shareholding and resulting pri- vate monopoly prevalent at the present time. Limited Ownership Private Monopoly All industries are the All industries are the mutual property of mil- private property of a few lions of people. families. All profits belong to All profits belong to a millions of families. few millionaire families. Millionaires in business Millionaires in business are unknown. own all the important in- dustries of the nation. Captains of industry can Captains of industry be obtained for $50,000 are drawing up to $50,- per annum. 000,000 per annum. l62 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. Limited Ownership The prices of goods are the lowest for the con- sumer, consistent with a reasonable profit for the owners. Expensive labor-saving machines and their prod- ucts belong to millions. Many thousands are em- ployed at comfortable wages, working seven hours a day, on the aver- age. Stock-watering is un- known. Equal rights to all, spe- cial privileges to none. Equitable distribution of wealth; all have "enough." Equality of opportuni- ty; anyone may rise to the highest position. La lustries of the peo- ple, by the people, and for the people. Private Monopoly The prices of goods are "fixed" for both the far- mer-producer and the pub- lic-consumer, yielding an "unreasonable" profit for the millionaire owners. Expensive labor-saving machines are faithfully working for the exclusive benefit of their owners, the millionaires in business. Many thousands, pref- erably illiterate foreign- ers, are employed at ex- istence wages of $9 a week, working ten hours a day, on the average. Stock- watering is a common occurrence, the people being defrauded of billions of dollars. Delusive rights to all, special privileges to the Kings of Wealth. Inequitable distribution of wealth : a few have "too much," many have "too little." Inequality of opportun- ity; no one may hope to ever equal the hereditary millionaire monopolist. Industries of the people, by the people and for the Kings of Wealth. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 1163 LIMITED OWNERSHIP THE REMEDY The principle of Limited Ownership antagonizes no accepted conception of private property, no more than did the Homestead Act. It merely proposes that the people own and manage all their industries in the same way as they own and manage their sav- ings banks, building and loan associations, and mu- tual insurance companies. It recommends sharehold- ing limited to a certain reasonable figure, and is op- posed solely to unlimited shareholding, the forerunner of private monopoly. It defends and upholds private property, moderated and limited; it attacks and will eventually abolish the anomalous unlimited property and its offspring, private monopoly. The history of every nation on earth unmistakably corroborates the truthfulness of the fact that, as soon as the wealth of a nation becomes concentrated into the possession of a few, the impoverishment of the people and the ruin of that nation follow. Such was the destiny of ancient Egypt, Rome, China, India, Poland, Russia, Turkey, and all of them, in fact. Some of the nations had 'their revolutionary upheavals, which acted as a stay to decay, but not one nation is to-day in a thoroughly healthy condition. Our own country is no exception to the rule. The economic disease, to which all nations com- monly succumb, is congestion of wealth. Like con- gestion of blood in a human body, this disease is oc- i64 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, casioned by an unnatural accumulation of the life- giving fluid in one part of the social body, at the ex- pense and exclusion of all other parts. All parts of the social body, except the one which is congested, are suffering from a lack of proper nourishment, are gradually being reduced in vitality and will degener- ate and die. If the diagnosis of this social disease is correct, then what is the task of the physician? Should not his very first effort be to devise and apply the proper means for sending that precious life blood from the congested part toward the parts which suffer from the lack of it? The proposed Law of Limited Owner- ship will fulfil this mission. It is devised to act di- rectly upon the root of the disease. It is not a half- hearted subterfuge like the income tax, inheritance tax, etc. It is, in its nature, a direct and prohibitory law. It will effectually cure the congestion by a direct prohibition of further ''private" accumulations of wealth and by establishing a reasonable limit to such accumulations, so as to give the life-blood of the nation a chance to reach all parts of the social body, and not limit it to only the few, specially privileged persons and families. As was shown in the preceding chapter, the proper time for the enactment of the Industrial Homestead Act embraced the period when the industries began their development. Our statesmen have missed their opportunity, and allowed unlimited ownership and private monopoly to congest the life-blood of the iTHE AMERICAN PEOPLE 165 nation, its wealth, to an alarming degree. From such lack of foresight the wealth of the American Na- tion is now congested to such an extent that only a radical measure can restore its circulation to a natu- ral condition. Limited Ownership is the measure. The proposed law of Limited Ownership prohibits an unreasonable unlimited accumulation of private wealth, but it does not recommend any confiscation. Let those who own now any amount of wealth con- tinue in the enjoyment of it during their natural life, but not after their death. This republic cannot af- ford to foster an hereditary plutocracy. The law of Limited Ownership will take care that none inherit more than the prescribed limit. It will discontinue forever the unjust, unnatural, and extremely harmful hereditary millionairism. Thus, in the course of a sin- gle generation, the obnoxious phenomenon, the mil- lionaire in business, will become a thing of the past; and he will take with him into oblivion his pet cre- ations. Private Monopoly and Private Trusts. BALLOT IS THE ONLY WEAPON WE NEED We, the people of this free and independent repub- lic, may well be ashamed for allowing things to exist which we know are wrong, and may be remedied. Oh, why and for what are we waiting. While our brothers droop and die, And on every breeze of the heavens A wasted life goes by? — William Morris. i66 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, The trouble is we are exercising our sovereignty by solemnly casting our votes for Smith or Brown, both equally crooked and scheming politicians, looking hungrily for a "job," and fully prepared to make hay while the sun shines (for them). In this unworthy manner we are using our right to govern ourselves and are electing, year after year, a swarm of grafters, bribe-takers, and so-much-per head officials and statesmen who are ready and anx- ious to do service for the highest bidder. The ballot is a mighty weapon. To turn it to such an ignominious use is worse than throwing it away. It means sullying it and bringing into disrepute. It also means displaying a woeful ignorance as to the obvious causes of the ills that are besetting our social life; for on all sides monopolists of every description are looting the people at will, sapping their very life- blood, while the general economic condition of the country grows more appalling every day. Yet, if used intelligently, the ballot is the only weapon we need. With its help we can easily and speedily establish a limited individual ownership of private property, which would render us free once more; free industrially as well as politically; free from life-long dependence upon the mercies of our present industrial masters; free from the compulsion of paying them a tribute in arbitrarily ''fixed" high prices, to pay which is far more humiliating than would have been the direct payment of a tribute to any foreign potentate. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 167 When we go again to the polling places shall it be ,the same old story of voting for Smith or Brown, or shall we cast our votes for one who will pledge himself to work for a measure that will bring us Lim- ited Ownership, which, as Dr. John Clark Ridpath said, "will rob private property of its power to curse and promote its power to bless"? Shall we continue the game of "blind man's buff" against "bad" trusts, and strive to "control" what cannot be controlled? Or shall we penetrate to the root of the evil, — unlimited ownership fraught with infinite evil, — and substitute for it just and equitable limited ownership? Shall we continue to allow our- selves to be fleeced by the all-grasping monopolists, or shall we brush them aside from the path of progress and civilization which they obstruct? Which shall it be? Let us vote for no CANDIDATE FOR CON- GRESS unless he pledges himself to the enactment of the LAW OF LIMITED PRIVATE OWNERSHIP! We certainly can never expect to emerge from in- dustrial thraldom unless we adopt the only effective political-economic measure, Limited Ownership, which is bound to lead us to an equitable distribution of wealth and free us forever from the iniquitous Private Monopolists. l68 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. CHAPTER Vin Arguments Against and for Limited Private Ownership While lecturing and debating upon the subject the writer met with objections and arguments which de- serve attention, and may as well be answered here. "HOW WOULD LAW OF LIMITED OWNER- SHIP BENEFIT MEr This was the foremost objection, and "ME'* was invariably spelled with capital letters. The objector manifestly could not rise above the common failing of many mortals, who place themselves in the very center of all creation. An abnormal sense of self- importance has obscured for him the otherwise self- evident truth that whatever benefits his community must eventually benefit him, as a unit of that com- munity. The proposed law is certainly not expected to en- dow any one with a ready-made fortune of $250,000, whether he earned it or not. It will merely limit the shareholding of any individual in any industry to that amount, giving thereby an equal opportunity to mil- lions of small investors to participate in the profits derived from the nation's industries. The objector, presumably not a millionaire, would obviously be benefited by such a limitation of individual sharehold- (THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 169 ing, unless he is neither industrious nor enterprising. In the latter case the proposed law will not help him, for it is not designed to bestow fortunes on idlers; quite the reverse. It will create more equitable oppor- tunities for all, and discontinue the special privileges of the few. "A QUARTER-MILLION DOLLARS NOT ENOUGH" Perhaps it is not "enough," according to present standards. Yet would it not be enough for you, my reader, to draw about $15,000 a year as long as you live for no harder work than to thoroughly enjoy yourself? On the other hand, it would surely be quite "enough" for any community to have a number of its able workingmen labor exclusively for your benefit (as was shown in Chapter III), supporting you in exactly the same way as an idle pauper is sup- ported in a poorhouse. Unless our understanding of the nature of "profits" is at fault, a profit-bringing property of $250,000 ought to be morally "enough," and more than enough, for any citizen worthy of the name, although it may not be "enough" for an Indian Rajah or a Chinese Mandarin. It should also be remembered that the law in ques- tion would limit only the private possessions of an individual, leaving untouched his privilege to draw any reasonable amount of remuneration for the actual 170 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, services which he may be able to render to the com- munity. Thus, anyone who is not an idler would have an absolutely equal opportunity with anyone else to earn, in addition to his vmearned profits, a salary as high as that of the President of the United States, or even higher, should his services be of greater value to the community. Would it still be not "enough"? "PRINCIPLE OF LIMITATION IS UN- AMERICAN" Were the principle of limitation un-American, this free and independent republic would never have come into being by the application of that very principle to the curtailment of the unlimited power of George III and his Parliament over the "Colonies." Our po- litical freedom was won and is maintained by the ap- plication of the same principle of a well-defined limi- tation to the will of an individual, imposed upon him out of regard for the welfare of the majority of the people. Our industrial freedom can be won in no other way. The American Homestead Act is, in the industrial sphere, the most important law of limitation ever en- acted in this world. It is thoroughly American. By this act a strict limitation was decreed as to the amount of land which might be preempted by any one citizen. It is a pity indeed that this wholesome American principle was abandoned in a later indus- trial life, and was substituted by that time-worn mon- THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 171 strosity, savoring of barbarism,— the principle of "grab-as-you-please." As soon as the democratic prin- ciple of limitation was lost sight of, the obnoxious flower of Private Monopoly blossomed forth; it grew rapidly to gigantic proportions, and is to-day blasting the life of this nation. As the main object of the principle of limited owner- ship is to discontinue hereditary millionairism, it is in strict keeping with the former American policy of our forefathers, who rejected entailment of estates, — a British principle of hereditary Ibrdism. The principle of Limitation is a principle of fair play, of a square deal ; both of which are undoubtedly American. "LIMITED OWNERSHIP WOULD STIFLE AMBITION AND CURB ENERGY" It certainly would, in a measure. But is a demo- cratic republic a proper place for fostering the am- bition of an individual to become a grab-it-all mon- ster? Or for encouraging his "energy" to build a despotically powerful monopoly, to crush all small dealers, "fix" the prices, and to arbitrarily tax the people? Let such ambition and such energy emi- grate to some other clime, to some autocratic em- pire. Here they should be both "stifled and curbed" by all the means within our power. On the other hand, a salary equal to that of the Chief Executive of the Nation, and the permission •172 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, to own a comfortable fortune which would yield a reasonable amount of absolutely unearned income, ought to be a sufficient incentive for the ability, am- bition and energy of anyone. A reward for enterprise and industry should not be perverted into a license to appropriate everything worth the taking. The cardinal principle of a demo- cratic republic, — "The greatest good for the greatest number," — is poorly served by such license. "MILLIONAIRES AND CAPITAL WOULD LEAVE THE COUNTRY'' Millionaires personally, as mere money bags, — such as W. W. A., the expatriated one, — are equally use- less, whether present or absent. But as regards their "capital," let us not forget that they cannot possibly take with them their business possessions, such as oil wells, coal mines, sugar refineries, railroads, etc. All these will remain where they are at present. But, in order to comply with the new law prescribing a limit of $250,000 for individual private property, they will have to, in course of time, acquire different owners. And, in such a case, each of these possessions would be owned by many thousands of small shareholders, instead of by a solitary millionaire, whether present or an absentee. The business property, — capital, — would simply change hands, to the evident advantage of the people, and that is all the "calamity" that would befall us THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 173 should our millionaires and billionaires choose to emi- grate to foreign lands. "THE PEOPLE ARE NOT RICH ENOUGH TO PURCHASE PROPERTY OF MILLIONAIRES" If that be true, then may the Lord have mercy on us as a nation. Fortunately, the statement is not cor- rect. The American people are not rich individually, but, in the aggregate, they are rich enough to own enormous deposits in the savings banks, building and loan associations and insurance companies. In fact, had the original capital for national industrial enter- prises been raised by popular subscription, — as it should have been, — and not by a small clique of Wall Street financiers, the American people, and not a few millionaires, would have been the actual owners and beneficiaries of American industries. The people are rich enough to be defrauded of many millions of dollars through impudent stock- watering by unscrupulous financiers, by the "get-rich- quick" swindlers, and by numberless political grafters all over this land. They are rich enough to be taxed unmercifully by arbitrary prices on the necessities of life, "fixed" by the monopolists "to suit themselves," and by those brazen conspirators who would rather burn coffee than bring comfort to millions of homes by selling it at a reasonable price. 174 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. They are rich enough, AS YET, to acquire and re- claim their industrial wealth, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE! "ENTERPRISES OF MILLIONAIRES BENE- FITED THE PEOPLE" True, the American people owe a debt of gratitude to Commodore Vanderbilt, Rockefeller, Carnegie, and other industrial pioneers and up-builders. The coun- try should be proud of them. Unfortunately, all these gentlemen labored at the time when that iniquity, unlimited ownership, held its full sway. Conse- quently, instead of remaining revered leaders in their respective industries, they have become hated mo- nopolists. Let us imagine that the Limited Ownership Law had been already on our statute books at the time when all these industrial giants commenced their ca- reers. They would have achieved the same success, would have built the same great industries; but they would have done so for the benefit of millions of small shareholders; and, withal, they would have been per- fectly satisfied with their large salaries of, say, $ioo,- 000 or more per annum. Then only would they have been considered as foremost citizens, esteemed and beloved by all, and not prosecuted, abhorred and looked upon as arch enemies of the people. Is it not plain that that absurdity, — unlimited pri- vate ownership,— DOES GOOD TO NO ONE? Is THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 175 it not a pity that an injustice is being done to the men mentioned, everyone of them a genius in his line? Their millions have outweighed their sterling quali- ties and great services. Their limitless accumulations have brought on them the hate of the people, and turned those who might have been beloved leaders into contemptible price-fixers, selfish monopolists and enemies of the community. There is not a shadow of a doubt that LIMITED OWNERSHIP WILL BENEFIT EVERYONE AND HURT NO ONE. '^MILLIONAIRES ARE EMPLOYING THOU- SANDS OF PEOPLE" And so did the Egyptian Pharaohs, who gave em- ployment to many thousands of wretches by forcing them to rear up the stupendous pyramids; and so did the Feudal Barons in the Dark Ages; and so did the ^'masters" ever employ the "servants"; Robinson Cru- soes, — Men Fridays ; for many thousands of years. It does not follow, however, that the free citizens of the American Republic should rest contented to remain forever in the class of "servants"; that they should relish the prospect of eternal servitude for the benefit of one or the other of the Industrial Kings. Let them, instead, make the wonderful labor-saving ma- chines their faithful servants. And so it certainly shall be some day, after the American people have succeeded in reclaiming, — with the help of the Law 176 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. of Limited Ownership, — the proprietorship of those innumerable labor-savers which are to-day completely monopolized by a few. As regards the employment to be had, and the wages to be paid for it, — when the American people own and manage their industries on a limited shareholding plan they will require the assistance and cooperation of as many thousands as are now employed, and of many more; and it is safe to predict that the wages will be much higher than they are at present, while the hours of labor will be reduced to four, or perhaps three a day, because the labor-saving machines will become the property of the people and will be operated FOR THE PEOPLE. There is nothing Utopian in this: WHEN PRI- VATE MONOPOLY DEPARTS THE PEOPLE WILL COME INTO THEIR OWN. "LIMITED OWNERSHIP LAW WILL BE EVADED" It will be evaded for some time, but not for all time. When the evaders have realized that the people are in earnest they will speedily discontinue unprofitable evasions. But, even should they go on with evasions, is it not better to have the evaders understand that they are "law-breakers" than to honor them and con- sider them benefactors, as is our custom to-day? Evasions are possible only as long as public officers are corrupt. With prosperity, corruption will cease. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 177 Because it is poverty that makes men corrupt. It is very shortsighted to assert that men are corrupt for v^ickedness' sake. The Great Founder of the Christian religion said: "Let him that is without sin cast the first stone." When the conditions in our social life shall have become gradually better, and poverty is on the de- crease, then a limited ownership law will be enforced by incorruptible officials. Meanwhile, we have no choice, but to try to achieve the desired results with such imperfect material as is in our possession. "THE LAW IS IMPRACTICABLE AND WILL BE INEFFECTIVE" There is no reason why it should be considered either impracticable or ineffective. Let us imagine that it has been passed and is recorded on our statute books. All those who own private property in excess of the prescribed limit of $250,000 have registered their possessions, and are aware that, should they subse- quently increase them, in defiance of the law, they would be punished. On the other hand if they remain satisfied with their possessions as registered, they will have the privilege of enjoying their wealth, no matter how large it may be (there appears no remedy for this) during their natural life, BUT NOT BEYOND IT. The Limited Ownership law will take care of the fabulous fortunes of present millionaires in such a way that they will be speedily disintegrated. They 1178 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. will be divided into as many parts, as many times $100,000 is contained in them : because no one will be permitted to bequeath or give away more than $ioo,- 000 to any one individual. For instance, a billionaire's heir will have the right to inherit just $100,000 of his father's property, and no more. The rest of the bil- lionaire's immense possessions will have to go to other relations and friends, whom he may have chosen as his beneficiaries and legatees; in default of such a provision, the entire billion dollar property, minus the shares of his legal heirs, each not to exceed $100,000, would revert to the people at large, that is, to the State. Thus, with the help of the proposed law of Limited Ownership our social and industrial life will present, in the course of a single generation, the following as- pect. No one will start in life with a larger fortune than $100,000 (this amount appears to be a reasonable expedient). Should he be ambitious and industrious, nothing will hinder him from taking an active part in the management of his business and draw as large a salary, for the actual services rendered, as his ser- vices may be worth. Suppose he proves to be another Edison or Rockefeller — surely no one would deny or grudge him a very large remuneration for his valuable services. He has actually earned it and is fully en- titled to the fruits of his toil, ingenuity and industry. Meanwhile, such anomalies as the modern IDLE MILLIONAIRES BY INHERITANCE will be made absolutely IMPOSSIBLE. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE 179 Therefore, the law of Limited Ownership is not only eminently just, but both practicable and eflEec- tive. LIMITED OWNERSHIP ENDORSED BY PROMINENT MEN Dr. John Clark Ridpath says, in "Limitation as a Remedy" : "It is not property, moderated and limited, but only the lawless excess of it, and the want of it, that curses the world. It is the 'too much' and the 'too little' that blasts the hopes of men. Is it not possible that the doctrine of limitation applied to prop- erty might rob it of its power to curse, and promote its power to bless? A large part of the distress of the modern world is attributable to the fact that there are established in the sphere of property rights no salu- tary and accepted principles of limitation. As the case now stands, a man may buy and hold in fee simple, under the law and constitution, . . . the whole Missis- sippi Valley. ... It is manifest that no man has a moral right to do this, or ever can have it: such a supposititious right is an absurdity per se. . . . A re- striction on land ownership is a necessity; the how much is another question. . , . The principle of un- limited ownership cannot be linger admitted, as a part of the rights of man, if civil and industrial liberty is to be maintained." The great philosopher, Aristotle, says: "In human society extremes of wealth and poverty are the main i8o KINGS OF WEALTH VS. sources of evil. The first brings arrogance; the sec- ond, slavishness. Where a population is divided into two classes of very rich and very poor there can be no real state; for there can be no real friendship between the classes, and friendship is the essential principle of all association." The great economist, John Stuart Mill, says: ''The form of the association which, if mankind continue to improve, must be expected in the end to predominate is the association of the laborers themselves on terms of equality, collectively owning the capital with which they carry on their operations, and working under managers elected and removable by themselves.'* (Does not this definition describe perfectly the "mu- tual" associations, such as the building and loan asso- ciations, etc., which are based on the principle of limited shareholding?) A prominent financier, George W. Perkins, uncon- sciously endorses the Limited Ownership idea by say- ing: **The corporations of the future will serve the public as semi-public servants, with ownership wide- spread among the public. In broadly distributed own- ership among the public the profits are distributed among the people, while for the benefit of the business is retained that necessary factor which has done so much for American industry, — individual initiative." A millionaire manufacturer, Andrew Carnegie, also unconsciously endorses the same idea : "We may look forward with hope to the day when it shall be the rule for the workman to be partner with capital, both iTHE AMERICAN PEOPLE i8i; owners of the shares and equally interested in the suc- cess of their joint efforts ; when a feeling of mutuality is created, which now is generally lacking." UNLIMITED WEALTH VS. UNLIMITED POVERTY It has been already pointed out above that American millionaires' possessions equal the total combined wealth of twenty-five States of the Union. Govern- ment Statistician George K. Holmes states in the "Political Science Quarterly" that our millionaires "own seventy-three per cent, of the total wealth of the country." Our country is blessed with a great many kings and barons: a cattle king, an oil king, coal barons, coffee barons, and many others. When a certain railroad king died he left to his heir, a hopeful youth, the snug fortune of $100,000,000. A similar fortune is the right- ful property of a McLean heir, age three years, who recently left Newport "in a special car, under guard of special detectives, and with a retinue of a small army of nurses." Young Vincent Astor is also the rightful owner of another $100,000,000 of wealth. When the oil king leaves this world his heir will inherit some- where between $500,000,000 and a billion. These are a few of the prominent representatives of unlimited mil- lionairism-by-inheritance. The following poetical description caught the yrriter's fancy: "For many miles in every direction, i82 KINGS OF WEALTH VS, as far as the eye could see, lay hundreds of thousands of acres of the Cattle King. In front of him, behind him, on either side, everywhere, every inch of soil, every bush and tree, belong to the Cattle King. The very air appeared to belong to him, the wind seemed to whisper his name to the trees, while the little brooks, as they babbled over the stones, murmured sweetly, 'Cattle King, Cattle King'; and the birds flying over his fields sang the same song of glorification to the Cattle King." *'Here, where dogs refuse to sleep," says Charles Dickens in "American Notes," "men, women and chil- dren come to seek refuge. Nowhere on the terrestrial globe are human beings placed in such miserable con- dition, as regards ventilation, light and odors arising from rear courts, as are those unfortunate beings who pass their wretched lives downtown in the city of New York." "Remember," says Cleveland Moffett, in "Shameful Misuse of Wealth," "the vast army of toilers enslaved in our factories and mines ; men, women and children, — millions of them, — giving the strength of their bodies and the hope of their souls, that a few thousand rich men may draw handsome dividends on invest- ments, dividends, which they have done nothing to cam, and which it bores them to spend." Says Walter Scott, in the person of Gurth ("Ivan- hoe") : "Little is left to us but the air we breathe, and that appears to have been reserved with much hesita- tion, soMy for the purpose of enabling us to endure iTHE AMERICAN PEOPLE 183 the tasks they lay upon our shoulders. The finest and the fattest is for their board; the loveliest is for their couch ; the best and bravest supply them with soldiers and whiten distant lands with their bones." The following appeal from the pen of Charles Dick- ens is pathetic: "Give us, in mercy, better homes, when we are a-lying in our cradles ; give us better food when we are a-working for our lives; give us kinder laws to bring us back when we are a-going wrong." Such is the pitiful cry of millions of the **Miserables" of the twentieth century. MILLIONAIRES WIELD UNLIMITED POWER OF REAL SOVEREIGNS "The welfare of the people depends upon the whims or personal interests of a few men," said Senator Car- ter of Montana in one of his eloquent speeches. "We are told that six or seven men, by reason of their con- trol of the railroads, have in their power to make or unmake a community, to make or unmake a nation. The life or death of this country is in their hands." It is an awful power for a free people to delegate to in- dividuals ! Says Senator Chauncey M. Depew : "There are fifty men in the city of New York who can in twenty-four hours stop every wheel on all railroads, close every door of all our factories, lock every switch on every telegraph line, and shut down every coal mine in the (United States. They can do so because they control i84 KINGS OF WEALTH VS. the money, industries and commerce of the United States." This is one of the most powerful arguments in favor of the speedy enactment of the Law of Limited Ownership. A certain American millionaire is said to have once exclaimed : "I can buy the whole d d outfit/' mean- ing the Legislature, Executive and the Courts of Jus- tice. It was only a paraphrase of a well-known out- burst of Commodore Vanderbilt: "The public be damned !" Jay Gould, the author of Black Friday, on which' ciay many began business in the morning as rich men and went home in the afternoon, ruined beggars, is said to have remarked more than once: "I am rich enough to hire one-half of the people to shoot the other half." Yet, many years ago, Jean Jacques Rousseau pointed out that "Real prosperity can exist only where no citizen is so rich as to be able to buy others, and no one so poor that he is compelled to sell himself." And, according to Daniel Webster: "Liberty cannot long endure in a country where the tendency is to concen- trate wealth in the hands of a few." THE FINAL APPEAL Now that my work is finished, I take this oppor- tunity of appealing to my countrymen to give the sub- ject of this treatise their earnest and unbiased con- sideration, and, should they find my reasoning correct, iTHE AMERICAN PEOPLE 185 let them not hesitate to adopt the proposed measure, however radical it may appear. Grave diseases re- quire powerful remedies. After many years of study of the great social prob- lem the writer is convinced that a direct and pro- hibitory law, limiting private ownership to any reason- able amount, is THE ONLY REMEDY for the cure of the dangerous, if not mortal, diseases of Congestion of Wealth and Unemployment. Oh, that these lines, written with no malice toward rich or poor, but with all sincerity and good-will to mankind, may perform the mission of another Paul Revere, dashing from village to village and awaken- ing the people with the call to arms: "Arouse, ye American freemen ! Plutocratic monopoly is upon us, despoiling us of our very lives !" Let us vote for no CANDIDATE FOR CONGRESS unless he pledges himself to the enactment of the LAW OF LIMITED PRIVATE OWNERSHIP. EDWARD N. OLLY. Hasbrouck Heights, N. J., Dec. i, 1913. DEC 13 1913 a:"HINKE:R@ ! ® CHOIv^R® ! Your attention is called to the new book just issued by us ENTITLED SUIiMING IT UP. By HENRy LEWIS HUBBARD. 12mo, 96 Pages. Cloth Bound, Price, 50 Cents; Paper Covers, 25 Cents. Beginning at the period in Biblical History where Noah and his family come out of the ark, the author has endeavored to take his readers through the principal evolutions of humanity to the present time. To make the subject comprehensive and untiring he has presented his review much as a public speaker would. The author perceives that the people are beginning to awaken to the necessity of a genuine brotherhood; that the duty of the church is becoming daily more apparent; that the furthering of worldly happiness of men is the common- sense step to higher perfection of their souls ; that there is no time to be. wasted by mankind to-day in a compromise with truth ; that the world has ceased to look for miracles ; and that the people are crying out for universal culture that will lead to conditions more conducive to health and happiness, if not abso- lute social equality. This book is just what its title signifies— a treatise on the problems of the present day, tracing the progress of the "greed " germ from Biblical times and setting forth a remedy to bring health and happiness to mankind. It will appeal to every thinking reader. Are you a thinker ? Are you interested in these vital prob- lems of every-day life ? If so, you should not fail to read this "book. It is for sale by booksellers and newsdealers everywhere, or it will be sent by mail, postpaid, to any address upon receipt of price. Address J. S. OaiLVIE PUBLISHmG COMPANY, P, 0. Box 767. 57 ROSE STREET, NEW YORK.