AN ADDRESS, 
 
 ■'>1 
 
 . 3 > 
 
 
AN ADDRESS 
 
 DELIVERED BEFORE THE 
 
 AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK, 
 
 IN CELEBRATION OP ITS 
 
 SEMI-CENTENJ[IAL AmVERSAEY, 
 
 THUESDAY EVENING, OCTOBEE 11, 1877. 
 
 ELLIOT O. GOWDIN. 
 
 New Yoke : 
 
 PRIHS-TEID FOR THE HSTSTITXJTE. 
 
 1877. 
 
\EXTRACT FROM THE MINUTES.I 
 
 At a joint meeting of the Board of Trustees and Board of Mana- 
 gers of the American Institute, of ' the City of New York, held on 
 Thursday, the 11th of October, the following Resolution was unani- 
 mously adopted : 
 
 Resolmd, That the thanks of the American Institute be presented to 
 the Hon. Elliot C. Cowdin, for the interesting and instructive 
 address delivered this evening, in celebration of the Semi-Cen- 
 tennial Anniversary of the American Institute, and that a copy of 
 the same be requested for publication. 
 
 JOHN W. CHAMBERS, 
 
 Secretary. 
 

 33/ 
 
 ADDRESS. 
 
 'CS 
 
 Mk. President, Ladies and Gentlemen ; 
 
 For the third time I have been honored with an invita- 
 tion to address yon on the occasion of your Annual Ex- 
 hibition, and it is highly gratifying to me to be able now 
 to unite with you in celebrating the Semi-Centennial An- 
 niversary of this useful and renowned institution. 
 
 In the year 1827, several public-spirited gentlemen of 
 ]^ew York conceived the idea of establishing in this me- 
 tropolis a national association for the protection of American 
 industry and labor, and in 1829 their enterprise assumed a 
 legal form, under an act of the Legislature, incorporating 
 The American Institute of the City of New ITorTc. 
 
 Its charter claims to encourage and promote domestic in- 
 dustry in agriculture, commerce, manufactures, and the arts, 
 by bestowing rewards on those who shall excel in these 
 branches. It is one of the attractive features of this organ- 
 ization that it is not bounded by State or municipal lines, 
 like most societies of an analogous kind, but is national in 
 its character. It not only fosters agriculture, commerce, 
 manufactures, and the arts in all their branches, but invites 
 to its exhibitions the products of industry and genius from all 
 ^ sections of the Uuion. And it is a noteworthy fact, unpre- 
 cedented in the history of similar enterprises, that from the 
 
4 
 
 first, in years of prosperity and adversity, in peace and in 
 war, this Institute has never failed to hold its Annual Ex- 
 hibition. 
 
 Duidng what an eventful half-century this association has 
 existed ! If it were possible to place the splendid display 
 of the present Exhibition side by side with some of the ear- 
 lier ones held by this Institute, we should have before us 
 striking proofs of the marvellous progress of the country 
 within that period in those pursuits that advance the inter- 
 ests, enhance the comforts, enlarge the knowledge, refine 
 the taste, and improve in a multiplicity of ways the condi- 
 tion of society. 
 
 Our republic has indeed grown wonderfully in all direc- 
 tions since your first Exhibition was held. We have added 
 to the Union hundreds of thousands of square miles of valua- 
 ble territory on the verge of the tropics, near the margin of the 
 Arctic circle, and along the Pacific coast. Of our territorial 
 wealth, an idea may be formed from the fact that Texas 
 alone is larger than France, which country supports a popu- 
 lation equal to ours of ten years ago. Cities have grown up 
 where there were then only little hamlets or a barren wil- 
 derness. W e have dotted the entire sm*f ace of the land with 
 schools and colleges. We have waged war on a scale that 
 astonished the world by its magnitude, placing in the field 
 in a single campaign armies more munerous than the en- 
 tire adult population of the coimtry at the time of the in 
 auguration of Washington. But throughout this half-cen- 
 tury of marvels, in nothing has the advance of the nation 
 been more rapid, beneficent, and gratifying than in those 
 useful pursuits and ornamental arts which it is the object 
 of the American Institute to protect and reward. 
 
 The American people are working out on a broader thea- 
 tre than that occupied by any other nation, certain grand 
 problems wherein are deeply involved the interests of man- 
 
5 
 
 kind. And it is not vainglorious to add that the peoples of 
 every clime, color, creed, and condition are watching the 
 solution of these problems with a solicitude proportioned to 
 their intelligence and their facilities for observation. I can 
 only name some of the chief of these problems : 
 
 1st. Whether a democratic-republican system of govern- 
 ment can exist for a long period in a country of vast extent, 
 inhabited by a large and diversified population ; 
 
 2d. Whether, in such a country, the utmost liberty of the 
 individual, including the right to elect his rulers, is compat- 
 ible with the maintenance of social order and the complete 
 supremacy of the laws ; 
 
 3d. Whether, in such a country, possessing unparalleled 
 natural resources, where vast amounts of capital are directed 
 and controlled by a few individuals, where large masses of 
 laborers are employed by corporations, and where the labor- 
 ing class forms the majority of the voting population, there 
 can be such harmony between capitalists and laborers as to 
 avoid either oppression on the one hand or discontent on 
 the other. 
 
 Besides these, many important questions might be enu- 
 merated which the American people are deciding before the 
 eyes of the world and for future ages ; but those just speci- 
 fied now demand peculiarly earnest and solemn attention. 
 Although these three subjects are closely allied, the first 
 two need only to be glanced at, while the last demands more 
 elaborate consideration. 
 
 The late civil war subjected our political institutions to a 
 test such as no modem nation has encountered. Both par- 
 ties to the conflict have emerged from the trial with a faith 
 in the stability and recuperative energy of our democratic- 
 republican system that was not excelled by that of the 
 Washingtons and Franklins, the Hamiltons and Madisons, 
 of the revolutionary and constitutional epochs. The results 
 
6 
 
 of our frecpently recurring elections, local, State, and na- 
 tional ; the respect felt for the laws by the great body of 
 our people, and the general disposition to remedy defects in 
 our civil system and abuses in its administration by the 
 peaceful agency of the ballot, have strengthened our heredi- 
 tary belief that the largest liberty of the individual and the 
 widest expansion of the suffrage are compatible with social 
 order in a great, entei*prising, and daring nation. 
 
 While the strikes and riots that have recently convulsed 
 the country have brought all three of these questions up for 
 review, they have imparted peculiar rividness and intensity 
 to discussions concerning theone last mentioned — Capital 
 cmcl Labor. 
 
 It seems to me, Mr. President, that no place or occasion 
 can be more appropriate for the consideration of this subject 
 than the anniversaiy of an association whose chief aim is to 
 promote and reward those vocations that depend for their 
 advancement, nay, for their very existence, upon the co- 
 operation of capital and labor. There is nothing either in 
 capital or labor that should make them antagonistic. Cap- 
 ital is of no value without labor ; and labor cannot flourish 
 without capital. Mutually dependent upon one another, 
 they ought always to be allies ; and society and government 
 should cherish and protect both. These propositions are so 
 self-evident that one would think they commanded universal 
 and unquestioning assent. TJnfortmiately the fatal fallacy 
 that capital and labor are enemies, that all capitalists are 
 despots and all laborers slaves, flnds credence with masses 
 of men in the Old World, and has even perverted many 
 minds in the IS’ew. 
 
 The tyranny of capital and the slavery of labor is a 
 fundamental article in the creed of the Internationals., and 
 underlies the despotism of the English Trades-Unions. It 
 flnds its exposition and victory in the Commime of Paris — 
 
7 
 
 one of the most remarkable episodes in the history of the 
 nineteenth century, to which I shall again refer. 
 
 We hear much just now of the rights of labor. But has 
 the laboring man any rights except those he holds in com- 
 mon with the rest of his fellow-citizens ? So, on the other 
 hand, the capitalist has no right to any exclusive privileges. 
 Widely as we may dilfer in capacity and opportunities, 
 equal rights before the law is the privilege of every Amer- 
 ican citizen, regardless of birth, race, or condition. 
 
 Every great enterprise is an illustration of the absolute 
 interdependence of capital and labor. The iron in the mine 
 is the capital of its owner. But it is dead capital until the 
 laborer brings it to the surface, and moulds it into useful 
 forms. Each class furnishes what the other needs ; and both 
 should be protected by and be obedient to equal laws. 
 
 W e are more or less familiar with three systems of labor as 
 they have existed in this country. First, chattel slavery, 
 wherein the capitalist absolutely owned the labor as prop" 
 erty. This is a very old system, widely prevalent in every 
 age. Happily for us, this unnatural relation of capital and 
 labor has disappeared from among us forever. 
 
 Another plan, pervading all civilized nations, is the wages 
 system. It is as old as the world. I must be understood as 
 referring to that relationship of capital and labor wherein 
 the laborer works for a stipulated rate, to be paid by his 
 employer, and in which the laborer has no direct pecuniary 
 interest in the products of his toil, whether the results are 
 profitable or otherwise. This is the method whereby the 
 great bulk of the business of this country, and indeed of all 
 commercial nations, is carried on. 
 
 The other system I will mention is that wherein the 
 workman shares more or less in the profits of the business in 
 which he is employed : sometimes being paid partly by 
 wages at a fixed rate, and partly by a percentage of the 
 
 % 
 
8 
 
 profits ; and, in other instances, being wholly compensated by 
 a share in the profits. This plan, in its main features, bears 
 a close resemblance to a common copartnership. It had 
 been adopted in this country, and in some others to a very 
 limited extent only, but is just now evoking much discussion 
 among us. 
 
 Another system is a modification of Fourierism or Com- 
 munism — where all things are held in common, and where 
 in reality every body owns every thing, and nobody owns 
 any thing. Excepting in some small associations like the 
 Shakers, this system exists in America rather as a theory 
 than as a fact. 
 
 The doctrines of recent French Communism are set forth 
 by its apostles and advocates in this country as follows : 
 
 “ The state shall take possession of and administer prop- 
 erty in the interest of the people, just as it administers the 
 postal service. The army and navy property belongs to the 
 state, and the state must have the direction of it. The gov- 
 ernment took possession of the slave property of the South. 
 The working-people are enslaved by capital ; the state must 
 emancipate the working-people by confiscating capital — the 
 chain which enthrals them. We are Communists,” - these 
 theorists say, “ but we are not for a division of property. 
 That has already been made, and the bulk of property has 
 come into the hands of a few rich men. Our plan is to 
 give property to the state — that is, to the entire people 
 instead of to a few.” 
 
 The French Communists entertained these views, and since 
 they are being seriously put forth and vehemently urged 
 upon the consideration of the workingmen of the United 
 States as the basis for political action, and since a tree is 
 known by its fruits, it may not be unprofitable to take a 
 rapid survey of the Commune of Paris now, held up for 
 our admiration and imitation, and in fact imitated to a cer- 
 
9 
 
 tain extent by the incendiaries and plunderers who, like the 
 Scotch Rob Roy, followed 
 
 “ the good old plan 
 
 That they should take who have the power, 
 
 And they should keep^who can.” 
 
 Under pretence that they only wanted local self-government, 
 the Communists of Paris, in the outset, secured the acqui- 
 escence of thousands of good citizens. Great meetings were 
 called, and there was chosen a famous committee, which was 
 to oppose the regular government of France. On that 
 committee there were the names of no men eminent for 
 character or ability, but, on the contrary, there were those 
 of men infamous for their crimes and atrocities, conspicuous 
 among whom was Assi, the chief fomenter of the strikes of 
 Creuzot, one of the leaders of the International Associoy- 
 tion of Worhingmen. 
 
 Proclamations bearing the historic device, Liberty, 
 Equality, Fraternity, were speedily issued. The first 
 decree appeared on the day the Prussians marched into 
 Paris. It informed the citizens that the committee, after 
 having thought of decreeing the annihilation of the enemy, 
 had given up that plan, and concluded to leave them undis- 
 turbed. 
 
 Every man, from nineteen to forty years of age, was 
 compelled to enroll himself in the marching battalions of 
 the National Guard, under penalty of being sentenced as a 
 deserter. 
 
 The Tricolor was hauled down, and in its place was raised 
 the Red Flag — the symbol of rebellion and murder. 
 
 Another decree suppressed the payment of three quarters 
 of rents due. 
 
 Confiscation of public and private property was the order 
 of the day. 
 
 Avowedly hostile to religion, they insulted the priests and 
 
10 
 
 decreed the confiscation of church property. They plun- 
 dered railway companies and emptied poor-boxes. They 
 undertook to rifie the vaults of the Bank of France, but 
 were repulsed by the energy and courage of its officers. 
 They fired upon a procession of peaceable, unarmed citizens 
 parading under the banner of Law and Order. All per- 
 sons suspected of loyalty to the regular government were 
 to be imprisoned and brought before a jury of accusation, 
 composed of National G-uards. If pronounced guilty, they 
 were to be shot on the first execution of a Communist by 
 the Versailles Government. It was by this' decree that 
 Monseigneur Darboy, Archbishop of Paris, in spite of the 
 earnest efforts of Minister Washburn e, was murdered ; as 
 w^ere also the Curate of the Madeleine, and several other 
 priests ; and notably M. Bonjean, President of the Court of 
 Appeals, one of the noblest of men, who fell a victim at the 
 hands of the assassins, even after the cause of the Commune 
 was irrevocably lost. 
 
 The first victims of the insurgents were two distinguished 
 generals. In the language of the Official Journal of the 
 Commune : 
 
 General Lecomte, having wished to fire on women and 
 children, and General Clement-Thomas, having gone to 
 Montmartre, to obtain a plan of the barricades, both had 
 been victims of popular justice.” Ay, in the name of 
 popular justice,” both were murdered without cause and 
 without trial by drunken brutes wearing the unifonn of the 
 National Guard. General Thomas, on being asked if he 
 had any thing to say ? Yes,” he exclaimed, as his dying 
 words ; you are cowards and assassins !” 
 
 When the Commune, after its reign of spoliation, de- 
 oauchery, madness, and murder, expired in blood and flame, 
 the International Society^ of London, hastened to indorse 
 and eulogize its crimes. In proof of this, I have to say that 
 
11 
 
 the General Council of the International Society issued 
 from its headquarters in London an address, in which the 
 burning of Paris and the execution of sixty-four hostages, 
 including the archbishop and chief-justice, were justified. 
 And moreover, the Paris Journal^ the organ of the Com- 
 mune, took the same ground in an elaborate article ending 
 thus : 
 
 “ The burning of Paris ! We accept the responsibility. 
 The old society must perish. It will perish. A gigan- 
 tic effort has already shaken it ; a final effort must pros- 
 trate it.” ■ 
 
 But, Mr. President, this is not the time nor the place to 
 dwell longer upon these tragic scenes, or to attempt to 
 analyze the acts of a body of men who claimed plenary, 
 legislative, and executive power, and who held Paris in 
 thrall for a brief period, and yet long enough to inflict in- 
 calculable misery on their country. Every one knows how 
 this terrible tragedy closed ; how the Communists did not 
 respect even a flag of truce, but butchered its bearer ; and 
 how, as an act of despairing vengeance, they decreed the 
 destruction of Paris — an act of vandalism long before pro- 
 jected, but fortunately only partially successful. All these 
 acts were mainly inspired by these modern regenerators of 
 society — the leaders of the International Association of 
 Workingmen. 
 
 Are you fully conscious, Mr- President, that emissaries 
 of this infamous organization, avowed Communists, are 
 now in our midst, ardently engaged in an attempt to inflame 
 workingmen against their employers, and to inculcate the 
 belief that they are their natural enemies ? It is a matter 
 of congratulation, however, that a late attempted Communist 
 demonstration in the city of New York was a complete 
 failure. He is a shallow and presumptuous person who 
 would attempt to undervalue the intelligence of the work- 
 
12 
 
 ing classes of America. Knowing, as they do, the necessity 
 for an absolute identity of interest between employer and 
 employed, they will never adopt the frantic follies of crazy 
 Utopians or self-seeking agitators. Even the most plausible 
 and insinuating advocates of Communism have made few 
 proselytes on this side of the Atlantic. 
 
 The American workingman stands on a vantage-ground 
 which is wanting to his trans-Atlantic brother. He has 
 the benefit of free schools, free speech, a free press, free 
 meetings, and a share, through the ballot, in municipal. 
 State, and national legislation. It is hard to convince such 
 a man that he is a slave. Moreover, when he surveys the 
 tyrant capitalists whom the Communist emissary points out 
 as despots, he finds that one graduated from the cai’penter’s 
 shop, another from the plough, another from the mine, 
 another from the ship’s deck, and so concludes that capital 
 itself is only a synonym for labor. 
 
 And now, Mr. President, having glanced at the various 
 systems of labor, and at one of the most significant manifest 
 tations of modern socialism, let me submit a few general 
 propositions perhaps not unworthy of the attention of em- 
 ployer and employed. 
 
 With us labor is free ! Ho man is bound to work for 
 another unless he chooses to do so. Ho man can be com- 
 pelled to accept of any rate of wages, or submit to any 
 special rales relating to his employment, unless he agrees 
 thereto. Any laborer has a right to use all his infiuence in 
 peaceful methods to persuade others to stop work at certain 
 rates, unless they are under contract to continue ; but he 
 has no right to coerce his fellow-laborers to cease working 
 on any conditions they see fit to make or agree to. Every 
 man is at liberty to work as few or as many hours 
 per day as he chooses, or as his physical condition will war- 
 rant. This is no new doctrine. A century ago, England’s 
 great economist, Adam Smith, declared that : 
 
13 
 
 The property which every man has in his own labor, as 
 it is the original foundation of all other property, so it is 
 the most sacred and inviolable. The patrimony of a poor 
 man lies in the strength and dexterity of his hands ; and 
 to hinder him from employing his strength and dexterity 
 in what manner he thinks proper, without injury to his 
 neighbor, is a plain violation of this most sacred property. 
 It is a manifest encroachment upon the just liberty of both 
 the workman and those who might be disposed to employ 
 him. As it hinders the one from working at what he thinks 
 proper, so it hinders the other from employing whom they 
 think proper.” 
 
 France, speaking by the voice of the illustrious Turgot, 
 the minister of Louis XYI., said : 
 
 Labor is the poor man’s property : no property is more 
 sacred : and neither time nor authority can sanction the vio- 
 lation of his right freely to dispose of this his only resource.” 
 Xo true friend of the laboring classes will make war on 
 this righteous doctrine. 
 
 On the other hand, capitalists have an unquestionable 
 right to make such contracts, rules, and regulations as may 
 be necessary to promote the best interests of their business, 
 as well as for the maintenance of good order — always mind- 
 ful that their welfare and that of their workmen are insep- 
 arable. 
 
 All combinations or conspiracies, either of capitalists or 
 laborers, the purpose whereof is to violate the fundamental 
 principles just laid down, are inimical to the public good, 
 and ought to be discountenanced. 
 
 The wages system doubtless admits of improvements. A 
 life of daily toil with the hands is full of trials. Capital, 
 and especially corporate capital, is sometimes oppressive^ 
 But there is nothing novel in this ; and I fear the time will 
 never come when some of the rich will not grind the faces 
 
14 
 
 of the poor, and some of the poor will not begrudge the 
 privileges of the rich. But laborers who envy the lot of 
 the seemingly wealthy man of business should know that 
 ofttimes he is entitled rather to their commiseration. 
 Lashed to his task by the exigencies of his business, 
 harassed by anxieties, fearing that the next turn in aft'airs 
 will blast his hopes and leave him at the mercy of clamor- 
 ous creditors, he often purchases his superior habiliments 
 and more sumptuous fare, and his exemption from mere 
 manual labor, at a cost utterly ruinous to his peace of mind, 
 not unfrequently whelming him in blank despair. It is an 
 instructive fact that in proportion to the number engaged, 
 ten merchants, bankers, and business men commit suicide 
 in this country to one common laborer. Nor, in taking a 
 broader view of this question, should it be forgotten, that 
 under our free institutions the mass of our youth start even 
 in life, one having just as good chances for rising in the 
 world as another ; and moreover, it should be remembered 
 that the great majority of our citizens who have attained 
 eminence, whether in public life, the professions, the arts 
 and sciences, trade and commerce, or who have managed 
 large business enterprises or accumulated vast wealth, were 
 cradled in obscurity and bred in poverty. I shall be ex- 
 cused for referring to such bright illustrations of this 
 truth as John Jacob Astor, Robert Fulton, Stephen Girard, 
 Henry Clay, Abbott Lawrence, Millard Fillmore, George 
 Peabody, Cornelius Yanderbilt, Abraham Lincoln. 
 
 Even when, under the iron heel of their employers, labor- 
 ers should know that strikes, riots, arson, murder, are the 
 worst possible remedies for the ills they are invoked to cure. 
 Let them know that in a land where all are equal before 
 the law, where all have an equal voice in framing the laws, 
 where the most exalted office is open to the ^humblest citi- 
 zen, there is no excuse for resorting to any but peaceful 
 
15 
 
 means for removing the evils that afflict any part of the 
 body politic. Is American labor circumvented by capital 
 and crushed by corporations ? 
 
 “ There is a weapon firmer set 
 And surer than the bayonet ; 
 
 A weapon that comes down as still 
 As snow-flakes fall upon the sod. 
 
 But executes a freeman’s will 
 As lightning does the will of God.” ^ 
 
 The discussion of these questions too often proceeds on 
 the erroneous assumption that only he who uses his sinews 
 can be properly called a laborer. But he who only em- 
 ploys his hands in turning over the clods of the field is no 
 more the laborer than he who produces a painting, or in- 
 vents a machine or writes a book. 
 
 Labor, in its diversified forms, is the natural lot of man. 
 The highest places in society are only obtained by active 
 and persistent industry, by unrelenting labor — labor of the 
 head and labor of the hand. Brains are not less worthy of 
 consideration than muscles. The genius that invented the 
 electric telegraph was as properly called a worker as the 
 artisan that manufactured the wire along which the light- 
 ning flashed messages. Mechanical labor was long since 
 divided into skilled and unskilled ; and, very justly, a far 
 higher estimate was put upon the former, because from the 
 same materials it could produce articles of far greater worth 
 than the latter. The laborer that hammers iron and steel 
 on an anvil, though performing a most useful service, is not 
 entitled to as much compensation as the mechanic who, by 
 exquisite manipulations, transforms that iron and steel into 
 wonder-working machines ; while far above either of these 
 we ought to place the genius who invented the machines. 
 And yet all are laborers, and each must bring his labor into 
 the market, and sell it for what it is worth. And though 
 
16 
 
 it may sometimes operate unjustly upon the lower class of 
 laborers, the fact will still remain that the rate of wages 
 will he determined by the economical laws that regulate 
 supply and demand, and that those who have only the abil- 
 ity to delve will not command as high wages as those who 
 can design with a fertile brain and execute with a facile 
 hand. And no trades-unions, or riotous strikes, or levelling 
 legislation, can suspend the operation of the inexorable law 
 that has determined that labor, whether mental or manual, 
 or both combined, must be sold for what it will bring. 
 Every description of service and all the professions are 
 placed in competition, and the most intelligent and ener- 
 getic are the most successful. 
 
 The plan of remunerating laborers in part by capitalists 
 dividing a portion of the profits of their business, has long 
 been advocated by a few theoretical minds. The recent 
 troubles on railroads, and in mining districts and manufac- 
 turing establishments, have brought it foi^ward for discus- 
 sion in some practical quarters demanding grave considera- 
 tion. Certainly no one ought to object to any corporation, 
 company, or establishment of any kind putting it into im- 
 mediate operation, if all parties concerned see fit to do so. 
 We are to assume that capital and labor are to join hands 
 in business, and stand by the result in common. 
 
 A large railway or mining company, for example, may 
 agree to compensate its laborers by a fixed sum per month, 
 and a small percentage of the profits besides. JSTow, this 
 would work admirably for the laborers in years when the 
 company made profits. But, in seasons of depression, there 
 would be years when there are no profits, but a dead loss 
 instead. Would the laborers be willing to contribute a cer- 
 tain percentage from their previous earnings to make up 
 this loss ? If not, why not ? For example : the company 
 in a given year may have made $100,000, ten per cent 
 
17 
 
 whereof they divided with their laborers. But the next 
 year the company may lose $100,000. Is the company which 
 divided ten per cent of its gains with its workmen the year 
 before, to now bear the whole loss ? Wonld this be equita- 
 ble or just ? 
 
 If this system is to be applied to one class of business, 
 why not to all which require a combination of capital and 
 labor for their prosecution ? Is there any thing in railroads, 
 or mining, or iron manufacturing, that specially adapts 
 them to the operation of this system, that does not apply 
 equally well to merchandising, banking, shipping, farming, 
 manufacturing, and indeed every sort of avocation in which 
 money is invested on the one hand and wages received on 
 the other ? 
 
 Perhaps the most feasible plan for solving this problem is 
 the Co-operative system^ which exists to some extent both in 
 Europe and America. Under this system the laborers have 
 a small interest in the profits, for which privilege they accept 
 lower rates of wages than are paid to others for like work. 
 In prosperous years, this method is advantageous to the work- 
 men ; but in seasons of depression, although not liable for the 
 losses, they have to submit to the reduced rates to enable 
 their employers to go on with the business. Is not this rea- 
 sonable and just ? Laborers should never forget that perma- 
 nent employment, even at comparatively low wages, is 
 infinitely better than occasional employment at higher rates. 
 Let them also remember that an intelligent workman, 
 thoroughly in earnest, is worth far more than one destitute 
 of knowledge and indifferent to his work, and will natu- 
 rally command higher wages. 
 
 Parents, think of this ! Facilities for instruction are now so 
 abundant that to deprive one’s children of a good practical 
 education is scarcely less than a crime. Beading, writing, 
 and arithmetic are the means of education. Geography 
 
18 
 
 and history are essential elements of useful knowledge, 
 l^atural philosophy, geometry, and elementary drawing are 
 important as parts of a good and sound practical education. 
 A knowledge of natural history is particularly adA^antageous 
 in many departments of industiy, besides refining the taste 
 and leading its votaries to 
 
 “ Find tongues in trees, books in the running brooks, 
 
 Sermons in stones, and good in every thing. ” 
 
 Some theonsts go to the extreme of wanting the Federal 
 Government to purchase and manage all railroads in the 
 nation, and to rim them imder its control and on account of 
 its treasury. This notion has long been entertained by a 
 small class of futile minds. It came from Europe, and has 
 its origin with French Communism. It assumed unusual 
 proportions here during and since the recent labor strikes, 
 and demands consideration. It seems to assiune that this 
 would be a complete remedy for the pretended antagonism 
 between capital and labor. But are railroads alone in- 
 volved in this controversy ? They are only one of the scores 
 of industries that require great outlays of money and vast 
 numbers of employes to conduct them. If the government 
 ought to own and manage them, then, by parity of reason- 
 ing, it ought to own and manage all the other great indus- 
 tries in the nation, spreading itself in all directions till it 
 carried on all the railroading, mining, navigation, transpor- 
 tation, merchandising, banking, printing, clothing, farming, 
 and what not, in the country. So logical is this deduction 
 that the original advocates of this erratic doctrine do apply 
 it to pretty much the whole business of the nation, making 
 this indeed a paternal government. 
 
 I need not say, Mr. President, that the universal or even 
 the general introduction of such a system into the business 
 of this country would work the greatest reimlution in soci- 
 ety that has occurred in any nation since the dawn of the 
 
19 
 
 Christian era. It would be a long stride toward that 
 Utopia where individual property would cease to exist, and 
 where all things would he held in common. And can it he 
 doubted that if, h}^ any possible process, society could be 
 now arranged on such a basis without so convulsing as to 
 utterly destroy it, the unnatural structure would soon fall 
 to pieces, and after passing through a chaotic epoch, would 
 gradually rebuild itself on very much the same ground it 
 now occupies ? Then is it not unwise and hazardous to en- 
 courage an experiment so fraught with peril ? This class 
 of theorists may be absurd, but they are at least consistent. 
 Are not those who would embrace only railroads within the 
 sweep of this theory both absurd and inconsistent ? 
 
 It is not necessary to expose the impolicy of such wild 
 schemes. Suffice it to say, that for the national govern- 
 ment to undertake to conduct the general business of the 
 country at the hazard of its treasury, would lead to untold 
 abuses and end in universal bankruptcy. 
 
 As for the rest, the cure for the evils complained of must 
 depend not upon legislation, but upon intelligence, sobriety, 
 industry, economy, integrity, and the silent operation of 
 those economic laws that move straight onward despite the 
 selfishness of capital or the clamor of labor. 
 
 An eminent Austrian has remarked that in his youth he 
 used to hear the inhabitants of the Austro-German Pro- 
 vinces recognize three countries : the whole country — which 
 was Germany, the smaller country — which was the Empire 
 of the Hapsburgs, and the still smaller country — which was 
 the particular province to which each inhabitant belonged. 
 In like manner, may it not be said that we have three coun- 
 tries — the Nation, the State, and the City, but happily all 
 forming one glorious Union ? Let our only division be a 
 division of labor — so essential to economical and indus- 
 trial progress. Let us be men — following attentively the 
 
20 
 
 facts as well as the ideas which are constantly developing 
 around us. Let ns belong to our own epoch by following 
 with close attention, aided by half a.centmy’s experience 
 of this valued Institute, all that takes place in the great 
 branches of commerce, art, industry, and labor in which we 
 may be interested. Above all, fellow-laborers, let us be 
 true to ourselves, true to our Coimtry, true to our State, true 
 to om* City, in faithfully performing every task that devolves 
 upon us. This is the only way to play our part and do our 
 duty toward ourselves and toward society.