diff options
| author | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-02-06 06:29:07 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-02-06 06:29:07 -0800 |
| commit | f4a3628721104b311b6e6a388a5d9f799b350b8c (patch) | |
| tree | 319be231e074117fc427167e77f20664449dfeeb | |
| parent | a917c956006240e22f455d20a03c0b3334ddf0f5 (diff) | |
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 4 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53052-0.txt | 6021 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53052-0.zip | bin | 130107 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53052-h.zip | bin | 185667 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53052-h/53052-h.htm | 7810 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53052-h/images/cover.jpg | bin | 45718 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53052-h/images/logo.jpg | bin | 2459 -> 0 bytes |
9 files changed, 17 insertions, 13831 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d7b82bc --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ +*.txt text eol=lf +*.htm text eol=lf +*.html text eol=lf +*.md text eol=lf diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..2e49983 --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #53052 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/53052) diff --git a/old/53052-0.txt b/old/53052-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index b814e20..0000000 --- a/old/53052-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,6021 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg eBook, Our Benevolent Feudalism, by William J. -(William James) Ghent - - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - - - - -Title: Our Benevolent Feudalism - - -Author: William J. (William James) Ghent - - - -Release Date: September 15, 2016 [eBook #53052] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - - -***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK OUR BENEVOLENT FEUDALISM*** - - -E-text prepared by Craig Kirkwood and the Online Distributed Proofreading -Team (http://www.pgdp.net) from page images generously made available by -Internet Archive/American Libraries (https://archive.org/details/americana) - - - -Note: Images of the original pages are available through - Internet Archive/American Libraries. See - https://archive.org/details/ourbenevolentfeu00ghenrich - - -Transcriber’s note: - - Text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_). - - An additional Transcriber’s note is at the end. - - - - - -OUR BENEVOLENT FEUDALISM - - -[Illustration: Publisher's logo] - - -OUR BENEVOLENT FEUDALISM - -by - -W. J. GHENT - - - - - - - -New York -The Macmillan Company -London: Macmillan & Co., Ltd. -1902 - -All rights reserved - -Copyright, 1902, -By The Macmillan Company. - -Set up and electrotyped October, 1902. - -Norwood Press -J. S. Cushing & Co.--Berwick & Smith -Norwood Mass. U.S.A. - - - - -PREFACE - - -The germ of this book was contained in an article published in the -_Independent_, April 3, 1902. The wide interest which that article -awakened prompted the elaboration and arrangement of its briefly -considered and somewhat disjointed parts into the present form. - -The chapters on “Our Makers of Law” and “Our Interpreters of Law” have -been carefully read by a member of the New York Bar who has made a -special study of the matters treated therein. Some of the decisions -cited in the latter chapter are admitted to be those of subordinate -courts in comparatively unimportant States. The intention, however, was -to give a general view of judicial interpretation; and for that reason -it became necessary to cite decisions of inferior as well as superior -courts, and those from semi-industrial as well as industrial States. - -As the book goes to press, the news is published that the anthracite -magnates have yielded and made concessions to public sentiment. It is -an act in harmony with the wiser forethought of most of the magnates -of to-day, and it strengthens the general seigniorial position -immeasurably. - - - - -CONTENTS - - - PAGE - - PREFACE v - - CHAPTER - - I. UTOPIAS AND OTHER FORECASTS 1 - - II. COMBINATION AND COALESCENCE 11 - - III. OUR MAGNATES 27 - - IV. OUR FARMERS AND WAGE-EARNERS 47 - - V. OUR MAKERS OF LAW 83 - - VI. OUR INTERPRETERS OF LAW 102 - - VII. OUR MOULDERS OF OPINION 122 - - VIII. GENERAL SOCIAL CHANGES 154 - - IX. TRANSITION AND FULFILMENT 180 - - INDEX 199 - - - - -CHAPTER I UTOPIAS AND OTHER FORECASTS - - -“The old order changeth, yielding place to new.” But what the new order -shall be is a matter of some diversity of opinion. Whoever, blessed -with hope, speculates upon the future of society, tends to imagine it -in the form of his social ideals. It matters little what the current -probabilities may be--the strong influence of the ideal warps the -judgment. To Thomas More, though most tendencies of his time made for -absolutism, the future was republican and communistic; and to Francis -Bacon the present held the promise of a new Atlantis, despite the -growing arrogance of the Crown and the submissiveness of the people. - -The great diversity of social ideals produces a like diversity of -social forecasts. All the soothsayers give different readings of the -signs. Even those of the same school, who build the future in the -light of the same dogmas, differ in regard to particulars of form -and structure. How many forecasts of one sort or another have been -given us, it is impossible to say. Mr. H. G. Wells, in a footnote to -his “Anticipations,” complains of their scarcity. “Of quite serious -forecasts and inductions of things to come,” he says, “the number is -very small indeed; a suggestion or so of Mr. Herbert Spencer’s, Mr. -Kidd’s ‘Social Evolution,’ some hints from Mr. Archdall Reid, some -political forecasts, German for the most part (Hartmann’s ‘Earth in the -Twentieth Century,’ _e.g._), some incidental forecasts by Professor -Langley (_Century Magazine_, December, 1884, _e.g._), and such isolated -computations as Professor Crookes’s wheat warning and the various -estimates of our coal supply, make almost a complete bibliography.” But -surely the Utopians, from Plato to Edward Bellamy, have given us “quite -serious forecasts”; there is something of serious prophecy in both Karl -Marx and Friedrich Engels, much more in Tolstoi and Peter Kropotkin; -and the “Fabian Essays” are charged with it. Mr. Henry D. Lloyd’s -“Wealth against Commonwealth” closes with a brilliant and eloquent -picture of a regenerated society, and Mr. Edmond Kelly’s “Individualism -and Collectivism” is in large part prophetic. All the social reformers -who write books or articles give us engaging pictures of things as -they are to be; and though the Philosophical Anarchists deal rather -more largely with polemics than with prophecy, the Socialists are -conspicuously definite and serious in their forecasts. Even the popular -scientists--the astronomers, biologists, and anthropologists--often run -into prediction; and in the pages of Richard A. Proctor, E. D. Cope, -and Grant Allen, and of such living men as M. Camille Flammarion, Mr. -Alfred Russell Wallace, and Professor W. J. McGee, we have frequent -depictions of certain phases of the future. - -Doubtless, any reader can add to this list. Of a surety, we have had -no lack of forecasts of one sort or another; and now we have some -new contributions,--Mr. Wells’s “Anticipations,” Mr. Benjamin Kidd’s -“Principles of Western Civilization,” two brief but sententious papers -by Professor John B. Clark, on “The Society of the Future” and “A -Modified Individualism” (published in the _Independent_), a definite -Socialist prediction by Mr. Henry D. Lloyd, and a semi-Socialist one by -Mr. Sidney Webb. - - -I - -Mr. Wells, in his lecture before the Royal Institution last January, -put forth the thesis that, just as we can picture the general aspects -of the earth in mesozoic times by a study of geology and paleontology, -so by a study of the present sociological drift can we picture the -society of a hundred years hence. He thereupon gives us “Anticipations” -as a result of the more or less rigorous working out of this method. -There is much to be said for the method, and its right employment might -probably give us something of great value. Unfortunately, Mr. Wells -forgets his thesis, and plunges into pure vaticination. He writes -with a spirited aggressiveness, and his pictures are often vivid and -impressive. But the greater part of his revelation is of a state of -things which seems far removed from what would be produced by any -current tendencies, actual or latent. - -Mr. Kidd’s predictions lack somewhat in definiteness of outline, and -need not here concern us. Tolstoi, on the other hand, is specific. -He dreams of a return to a more primitive manner of production, and a -social change toward a status of Anarchist-Communism. He scoffs at the -enormous diversity of wants made necessary by the growing intelligence -and refinement of the race, and urges mankind to live more simply. “The -town must be abandoned, the people must be sent away from the factories -and into the country to work with their hands; the aim of every man -should be to satisfy all his wants himself.” But the counsel falls -upon heedless ears. Urged to live more simply, the race, impelled by -natural and irresistible laws, yearly increases the sum of its wants. -Science, art, and industry constantly pile up new commodities. Mankind -finds that through them it secures longer and healthier, if not happier -lives. It recognizes that by this increase of wants more human beings -are employed, and that by a slight diminution thereof tens of thousands -are thrown into idleness. And finally it recognizes that by a division -of labor, in which natural aptitude in particular directions is sought -to be secured, the greatest and most economical production follows. -Under Anarchist-Communism and the performance of labor in the direction -of each individual attempting to create the things needful for himself, -there would be entailed upon us a productive waste vastly greater than -that heretofore compelled by capitalism, diffusing a degree of want -and consequent wretchedness at present unknown. There is no present -indication that mankind will take this step. - -Something better is to be said for Peter Kropotkin’s ideal of a -communistic union of shop industry and agriculture. In remote places, -outside the current of factory industrialism, there are still survivals -of this union, though the communistic feature is generally wanting. -Doubtless, under any form of society, even a well-regulated State -Socialism, this union would to some extent persist. But if there are -any present tendencies toward its growth, they are but feeble and -isolated. Kropotkin’s recent book, “Fields, Factories and Workshops,” -which was intended to sound the glad timbrel of rejoicing over the -expansion of this movement, turns out to be a rather pitiful threnody -on the decline and death of petty industries throughout Europe. -Moreover, it is one thing to argue the persistence of this manner of -production in scattered places, and quite another to argue it the -dominant manner of production in a transformed society of the future. -Of the coming of such a society the evidences are painfully scant. - -We have also the Single-Taxers, the followers of the late Henry George, -who are quite as fertile in prophecy as in polemics. They dream of a -millennium through the imposition of a tax on the economic value of -land, and the abolition of all other taxes and duties of whatsoever -kind. Free competition is their shibboleth; and it is no less the -shibboleth of the Neo-Jeffersonians, the followers of Mr. Bryan. -Except for the fact that these two schools are somewhat Jacobinical, -their general notions of the coming society do not differ greatly -from the notions of the orthodox economists. All of these desire, -or think they desire, free competition. Arising out of an era of -competition, Professor Clark sees a coming order wherein the rich “will -continually grow richer, and the multi-millionnaires will approach -the billion-dollar standard; but the poor will be far from growing -poorer.... It may be that the wages of a day will take him [the worker] -to the mountains, and those of a hundred days will carry him through a -European tour.” - -The dreadful spectre of monopoly, however, arises to threaten these -visions. Most of the orthodox economists acknowledge a possible danger -from it, but the Single-Taxers and Jeffersonians are sure it is a real -and growing menace. Says Professor Clark, “Between us and the régime -of monopoly there ranges itself a whole series of possible measures -stopping short of Socialism, and yet efficient enough to preserve our -free economic system.” It is a “free economic system” which all these -are bent on having,--the economists determined on preserving it, the -others on establishing it; for the Single-Taxers, with their _bête -noir_ of private ownership of land, and the Jeffersonians, with their -_bêtes noirs_ of railroads and trusts, deny that our economic system -is at present “free.” Doubtless they are both right; but if there be -one fact in the realm of political economy fairly established, it is -that the era of competition, whether free or unfree, is dead, and the -means of its resurrection are unknown to political science. With old -men the dream of its revival is warrantable, for it springs from that -retrospective mood of age which gilds past times, and that attendant -mood which recreates and projects them into some imagined future; but -with the younger generation visions of free competition are but as -children’s dreams of wild forests and shaggy animals--the atavistic -reminders of experiences unknown to the individual, though knit into -the fibre of the race. The subject is one far better suited to the -domain of a psychologist like Dr. Stanley Hall than to the scope of -this book. - -Finally, we have the Socialists, with their prophecy of the early -establishment of a coöperative commonwealth. It is a noble picture, -in its best expression based upon the extreme of faith in the coming -generations of mankind, however its draughtsmen may criticise the -wisdom and justice of the present. There is no doubt that now a -ground-swell of Socialist conviction moves like a tide “of waters -unwithstood”; everywhere one notes its influences. Even so conservative -a scholar as Professor Henry Davies, lecturer on the history of -philosophy in Yale University, can write, “There is no doubt that the -next form of political activity to claim attention is the socialistic, -as it is the most popular and serious of any now before the educated -minds of this country.” Its propaganda is carried on untiringly, and -that its results are feared is evident from the equal aggressiveness -of a counter-propaganda maintained by the ingenious defenders of the -present régime against the whole form and spirit of Socialism. But -though socialist conviction spreads, the substance sought for seems -as far away as ever. It would seem, for the most part, to be but a -lukewarm conviction, much like that for which the Laodiceans were so -widely famed. Present tendencies make for other forms of production, -for a vastly different social régime. - - -II - -The dominant tendencies will be clearly seen only by those who for -the time detach themselves from their social ideals. What, then, in -this republic of the United States, may Socialist, Individualist, -and Conservative alike see, if only they will look with unclouded -vision? In brief, an irresistible movement--now almost at its -culmination--toward great combinations in specific trades; next toward -coalescence of kindred industries, and thus toward the complete -integration of capital. Consequent upon these changes, the group of -captains and lieutenants of industry attains a daily increasing power, -social, industrial, and political, and becomes the ranking order -in a vast series of gradations. The State becomes stronger in its -relation to the propertyless citizen, weaker in its relation to the -man of capital. A growing subordination of classes, and a tremendous -increase in the numbers of the lower orders, follow. Factory industry -increases, and the petty industries, while still supporting a great -number of workers, are in all respects relatively weaker than ever -before; they suffer a progressive limitation of scope and function -and a decrease of revenues. Defenceless labor--the labor of women -and children--increases both absolutely and relatively. Men’s wages -decline or remain stationary, while the value of the product and the -cost of living advance by steady steps. Though land is generally held -in somewhat smaller allotments, tenantry on the small holdings, and -salaried management on the large, gradually replace the old system of -independent farming; and the control of agriculture oscillates between -the combinations that determine the prices of its products and the -railroads that determine the rate for transportation to the markets. - -In a word, they who desire to live--whether farmers, workmen, -middlemen, teachers, or ministers--must make their peace with those -who have the disposition of the livings. The result is a renascent -Feudalism, which, though it differs in many forms from that of the -time of Edward I, is yet based upon the same status of lord, agent, -and underling. It is a Feudalism somewhat graced by a sense of ethics -and somewhat restrained by a fear of democracy. The new barons seek -a public sanction through conspicuous giving, and they avoid a too -obvious exercise of their power upon political institutions. Their -beneficence, however, though large, is but rarely prodigal. It -betokens, as in the case of the careful spouse of John Gilpin, a frugal -mind. They demand the full terms nominated in the bond; they exact from -the traffic all it will bear. Out of the tremendous revenues that flow -to them some of them return a part in benefactions to the public; and -these benefactions, whether or not primarily devoted to the easement of -conscience, are always shrewdly disposed with an eye to the allayment -of pain and the quieting of discontent. They are given to hospitals; to -colleges and churches which teach reverence for the existing régime, -and to libraries, wherein the enforced leisure of the unemployed -may be whiled away in relative contentment. They are never given, -even by accident, to any of the movements making for the correction -of what reformers term injustice. But not to look too curiously into -motives, our new Feudalism is at least considerate. It is a paternal, a -Benevolent Feudalism. - - - - -CHAPTER II COMBINATION AND COALESCENCE - - -I - -We have, first, the enormous growth of industrial, commercial, -and financial combinations. A crude idea of the extent to which -concentration in manufactures had grown up to May 31, 1900, may -be gained from Census Bulletin No. 122. In this report only those -aggregations are considered which consisted of “a number of formerly -independent mills which have been brought together into one company -under a charter obtained for that purpose.” Several of the new -security-holding stock companies are included, but “many large -establishments comprising a number of mills which have grown up, not -by combination with other mills, but by erection of new plants or the -purchase of old ones,” are not considered, nor are gas and electric -lighting plants, or pools, and “gentlemen’s agreements.” - -The list contains records of 183 corporations, with 2029 active and 174 -idle plants, an average of 11 active plants each. The actual capital -invested in these corporations, exclusive of that for 56 of the idle -plants, was $1,458,522,573, and the authorized capitalization was -$3,607,539,200. These combinations employed 24,585 salaried officers -and clerks, and an average of 399,192 wage-earners. The 1047 officers -received an average of $6,825.28 yearly and the wage-earners, $487.32. -There were 40 combinations in iron and steel, with 447 plants; 28 in -liquor and beverages, with 219 plants; 21 in food and allied products, -with 273 plants; 15 in clay, glass, and stone products, with 180 -plants, and 14 in chemicals, with 248 plants. The gross value of the -manufactured product of these combinations, as given by the census, -was $1,661,295,364. Excluding hand trades, government establishments, -educational, eleemosynary, and penal workshops, and shops with a -product of less than $500, this total represented 14 per cent of the -value of the manufactured product for the whole country. - -The spring of 1900 was, however, but the mid-morning of the combination -movement. Only 63 of these companies had been formed previous to -1897, while more than 50 per cent of them were formed during the -eighteen months from January 1, 1899, to June 30, 1900. Since then -the movement has swept forward like a great tide. The consolidations -of manufacturing companies for the first five months of 1901 alone -probably exceeded $2,000,000,000 in capitalization. The great steel -“trust” (to use the popular term), an $88,000,000 tin-can trust, still -other trusts in tobacco machinery, carpets, coal and coke, witch-hazel, -glass lamps and electric glass fittings, ship-building, cotton duck, -agricultural implements, and watches, had their birth during this -period. More recently came the steel-castings trust, subordinate to the -steel corporation, a recombination in tobacco, and very lately a new -ship-building combination, a $120,000,000 harvester trust, and a cotton -compress trust. The capital invested in manufacturing combinations is -now probably two and one-half times what it was in May, 1900; and it is -a reasonable guess that nearly one-third of the manufactured product of -the country, outside of the petty trades, comes from the combinations. - -Of the magnitude of some of these concerns the average mind can form -but an inadequate idea. The figures expressing it are comparable with -those of star distances, which must be transmuted into light-years to -make them conceivable. A New York newspaper has recently made some -computations on the great steel trust, which help to bring home to us -a realization of its size and power. Its yearly net profits are now -double the amount of the total revenues of the United States Government -in the year Lincoln was elected. Its wage-roll carries on an average -of the round year over 158,000 names--an army of employees larger by -45,000 than serves the National Government in every branch of its -civil service, classified and unclassified, except only fourth-class -postmasters. Its wage-payments for last year aggregated nearly -$113,000,000, more by $13,000,000 than the huge annual city budget of -Greater New York. Its annual production of steel is 10,000,000 tons, -67 per cent of the total production of the country; and its freight -payments for the year 1901 amounted to more than $54,000,000. - -During the same period financial, commercial, mining, and -transportation trusts have also had their splendid inning. We read -of an accident-insurance trust with a capitalization of $50,000,000, -the great shipping trust, the $120,000,000 jobbing hardware trust, the -Interurban Street Railway stock-holding combination, the beef trust, -a $50,000,000 lead merger, a recombination in copper, and a universal -oil trust. _Moody’s Manual of Corporation Securities_ for 1902 gives a -list of 82 industrial and mercantile consolidations effected between -January 1, 1899, and September 1, 1902, each of which is capitalized -at $10,000,000 or more, the whole aggregating a capitalization of -$4,318,005,646. Thirty-nine of these, with $1,232,947,790 authorized -capital, were formed during 1899; 7 with $186,110,400 capital, in -1900; 20 with $2,141,197,456 capital in 1901, and 16 with $757,750,000 -capital during the first eight months of 1902. The list is admittedly -incomplete. “It embraces only the so-called gigantic combinations -which have been forming in the past three and one-half years. A -complete list, without regard to date of formation, and including -both large and small,” says this authority, “would probably aggregate -850 different-going combinations, and would easily foot up over -$9,000,000,000 of capitalization. Including railroad consolidations, -such a list would make a total of over $15,000,000,000 outstanding -capitalization.” As for the railroads, the formation of the Northern -Securities Company, the recent assimilation of the Louisville and -Nashville, and the “reorganization” of the Rock Island show the -same drift. Five men, according to a recent statement of Interstate -Commerce Commissioner J. A. Prouty, control all the railroads of the -country; and Mr. John W. Gates, a financier who may be supposed to -know something on that head, has more recently declared, according to -a newspaper interview, that two men are really in control. “I believe -that the time is not far distant,” declared Professor Francis L. -Patton, former head of Princeton University, in a recent address before -the Presbyterian Social Union of Chicago, “when there will not be a -thing that we eat, drink, or wear that will not be made by a trust.” -He might have gone farther and fared as well; for the theatrical -trust determines what dramas we shall witness; the pulp trust, the -typefounders’ trust, the news trust, and the school-book trust exert a -most direct bearing on what we read and what our reading costs us; and -finally the undertakers’ trust determines the style and cost of our -burial. - - -II - -The tendencies make not only for combination in specific trades, but -for unification--for complete integration of all capital which is -susceptible of organization. Capitalistic atoms of low valency--to -use a term from chemistry,--such as those invested in some of the -hand trades, custom and repairing and the like--may continue their -course, but those of a high valency are sooner or later brought into -association. From this fundamental grouping comes integration, the -concentration of the material units which go to make up an aggregate. -The lesser gravitates to the larger. It needs no modern Newton to -proclaim that in finance, commerce, and industry, as in the physical -world, all bodies attract one another in direct proportion to their -mass. Distance provides a limitation, it is true, to the action of -this law in the physical world; but less so in the economic world, for -such is the perfection of our means of communication that they provide -a more transmissible medium to capital than is the pervading ether to -light and gravitation. - -The separate trade trusts are not sufficient unto themselves, but -move steadily toward unification. A glance at the directorates of -the leading combinations shows many names repeated through a long -list of varied industries. The combinations themselves reach out and -acquire new interests, often distinct from their primary interests. In -Pennsylvania coal is mined and railroads are operated by practically -the same companies, and in Colorado and West Virginia nearly as -complete an identity is discovered. The steel corporation owns coal -lands, limestone quarries, railroads, and docks; it is allied with the -great Atlantic shipping trust; it is related, not distantly, to the -Standard Oil Company; and the beginnings of a public opinion trust -are indicated, for already its chief magnate has acquired several -newspapers and a prominent magazine. Bishop Potter’s prediction, it -would seem, is in fair way of fulfilment. “We must fully realize,” he -said to the Yale students last April, “the danger that mind as well -as matter will be at some time in the future capitalized, and that -the real thinking and planning for the many will be done by a mere -handful.” Beet and cane sugar are soon to be joined, we read; paper and -lumber, if not already wedded, are at least on excellent terms. Oil -and gas on the one hand, coal and iron on the other, have a “common -understanding,” and each of them holds morganatic relations with one -or more of the railroads. All the great combinations recognize a -growing community of interest; they tend more and more to a potential, -if not an actual, coalescence; and in the face of popular agitation, -legislative aggressiveness, or the formal demands of labor, they -develop a unity of purpose and method. Their support is thrown, in -general, to the same candidates for governors, senators, judges, and -tax assessors. In brief, they tend to the formation of a state within -a state, and their individual members to the creation of an industrial -and political hierarchy. - - -III - -The counter-tendency toward the persistence of small-unit farming and -of small-shop production and distribution must not be lost sight of, -nor must the great combinations be looked upon as necessarily a proof -of individual concentration of wealth. That they generally so result is -hardly to be disputed; but primarily, they mean the massing together of -separately owned capitals, often small, for a particular use. There is -every reason to suppose that the shareholders grow in numbers, and that -they increase their holdings. So that while the magnates tend to become -Midases, there is a concurrent tendency making for diffused ownership. -The small investor is to be found in every stratum of society, and the -number of shareholders in some of the great combinations reaches an -astonishing figure. The “one touch of nature” which in Shakespeare’s -eyes made the whole world kin was the love of novelty; in our day it is -the passion for investing in shares. - -Petty industries and small-unit farming persist, despite the movement -toward combination. The recent census gives the number of manufacturing -establishments in the United States as 512,726, an increase of 44.3 -per cent. This is a larger percentage of increase than is shown for -any other of the fifteen items in the census summary of manufactures, -except capital, children’s wages, and miscellaneous expenses. Doubtless -many of these establishments belong to the trusts; but with all -allowances the numerical growth is remarkable. The undeveloped sections -show the greatest increase, but even industrially settled States, -such as Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island, reveal marked -gains. Professor Ely has pointed out several branches of industry in -which small-shop production is increasing. Some investigations which -the present writer made two years ago in two branches confirm this -tendency. It is pronounced in the notion trades and in the manufacture -of women’s ready-made wear. In the latter the industry has been -revolutionized, the large houses being menaced with disaster and some -of them with extinction. In dry-goods distribution the tendencies are -confused and puzzling. While the number of general jobbing houses in -New York City has decreased from thirty-five to five in twenty-five -years, the remaining ones growing to enormous proportions, the number -of smaller houses distributing special lines has either maintained -its own or has grown. In Baltimore and St. Louis small jobbing houses -persist in the face of the larger houses. In the retail trades, even in -New York, despite the creation of a number of mammoth general stores, -the dullest observer will note the continuance of thousands of small -grocery, dry-goods, and furniture stores, confectionery and butcher -shops; while custom and repairing work is still done in the little -tailoring and shoemaking shops that speak a sort of defiance to the -great emporiums. Through convenience of location to the community of -customers about them--often, too, by the giving of credit--many of -these little shops and stores furnish a social service that cannot be -performed by the larger stores, which are mostly to be found massed in -the central shopping district. - -Something of the same nature is to be found in agriculture. Though the -great estates are increasing in size, so also is the number of small -holdings increasing. Nearly every State and Territory shows an increase -in the number of farms, while the majority show a decrease in average -acreage. The great stock-grazing farms of the West and the unproductive -“gentlemen’s estates” of the East help to make the census figures -misleading. It is probable that in every State real farming is done on -a smaller average acreage than ever before. - -Even independent capital in trading and manufactures shows an -unexpected persistence. An interesting article in a recent issue of -the New York _Journal of Commerce_ puts the capitalization of the -great trusts for the twelve years ending with 1901 at $6,474,000,000, -of which it marks off $2,000,000,000 as “spurious common stock,” that -is, stock not representing real capital in any form. Not more than -$300,000,000 of new capital, it maintains, had been thrown into the -consolidations. This would leave $4,474,000,000 as the sum of values -already established by previous investment. On the other hand, it -maintains that actual records show that in seventeen months from -the beginning of 1901, in the four States of New York, New Jersey, -Delaware, and Maine, the aggregate capitalization of newly organized -companies with a capital of $1,000,000 and upwards is $1,969,650,000; -and it calculates that for the whole country, including the large and -small corporations, “the national industrial capital (exclusive of -that for transportation appliances) must have increased approximately -$5,000,000,000 since the end of 1900.” Several rather obvious demurrers -might be made to the conclusions reached, but they need not now concern -us. With all possible discounting, strong proof is given of the -aggressive persistence of independent capital. - - -IV - -Such facts, however, do not carry on the surface their real import. -Independent capital persists as a force, but the units that compose -it melt like bubbles in a stream. These companies are but the raw or -“partly manufactured” material out of which the great combinations are -made. Formation, growth, and absorption into a trust are generally the -three terms in their life-history; or if, through ill environment -or spirited warfare waged against them, they fail to get secure -footing, they soon slip back into the slough of disaster. The fate of -independent tobacco factories, sugar and oil refineries, railroads, -independent companies of one kind or another, is constantly before -us. If they are worth having, they are more or less benevolently -assimilated; and if they are not worth having, they are permitted to -struggle onward to the almost inevitable collapse. - -Neither do small holdings in agriculture mean economic independence. -As the late census reveals, they mean tenantry. The number of farms -operated by owners is decreasing; tenantry is becoming more and -more common, and so is salaried management of great estates. Of the -5,739,657 farms of the nation, tenants now operate 2,026,286. Owners -operated 74.5 per cent of all farms in 1880, 71.6 per cent in 1890, -64.7 per cent in 1900. The tendency is general, and applies to all -sections. Since 1880 tenantry has relatively increased in every State -and Territory (no comparative data are given for the Indian Territory) -except Arizona, Florida, and New Hampshire. Since 1890 it has increased -in Arizona. In twenty years it has increased 49.4 per cent in Florida, -though the unloading of “orange groves” and other tropical paradises on -the too susceptible Northerner has increased ownership by a slightly -greater ratio; while in New Hampshire, where 2857 farms have been given -up in the last twenty years, tenantry has decreased by but five-tenths -of 1 per cent since 1890, and but six-tenths of 1 per cent since 1880. - -So, too, with petty industries and the small retailers. M. Emile -Vandervelde, in his sterling work, “Collectivism and Industrial -Evolution,” has well shown how “small trade is the special refuge of -the cripples of capitalism.” It is the particular refuge “of all who -prefer, in place of the hard labor of production, the scanty gleaning -of the middleman, or who, no longer finding a sufficient revenue in -industry or farming, desire to add a string to their bow by opening a -little shop.” But it would be a mistake, he continues, to suppose that -these miniature establishments, which the census officials characterize -as distinct enterprises, can be generally regarded as the personal -property of those who carry them on. “A great number of them, and a -number constantly increasing, as capitalism develops, have only a -phantom of independence, and are really in the hands of a few great -money lenders, manufacturers, or merchants.” - -Though M. Vandervelde argues on the basis of these phenomena as -observed in Belgium, France, Germany, and England, the same conclusions -are applicable in the United States. Our national census figures are -practically useless as illuminators on the subject, and one must get -his data from the observation or investigation of himself or others. It -is generally known that small industries the product of which is more -or less ingenious or artistic manage to survive; that those the product -of which is common or usual are sooner or later extinguished; and that -the petty retailers represent so many heterogeneous elements that -it is impossible to predicate anything of them as a class. Of these -latter there is a moderate number who, by furnishing a needful social -service, make profits; there is a large and constantly changing number -who, through ease of credit, manage to obtain stock without capital, -and who almost invariably succumb; there is then a larger number whose -little shops are run by women and children, the husbands and fathers -working at some trade or office job, and hopefully expending their -weekly earnings in the vain attempt to “build up a business”; finally, -there is a class, the numbers and relative importance of which it -is impossible to estimate, whose businesses are owned, directly or -indirectly, by other men or by companies. - - -V - -Many of these so-called independent concerns find it possible, and -some of them find it fairly profitable, to continue. But the more the -large combinations wax in power, the greater is the subordination of -the small concerns. An increasing constraint characterizes all their -efforts. They are more closely confined to particular activities and -to local territories, their bounds being dictated and enforced by -the pressure of the combinations. The petty tradesmen and producers -are thus an economically dependent class. Equally subordinate--and -for the most part subservient--are the owners of small and moderate -holdings in the trusts. The larger holdings--often the single -largest holding--determine what shall be done. Generally, too, the -petty investors are acquiescent to the will of the Big Men. But -occasionally, as in the case of the transfer of the Metropolitan Street -Railway stock, they rebel, and it becomes necessary to suppress them. -At the meeting which determined this action, the protesting minority -were emphatically ordered to “shut up”; when they still objected, -the presiding officer declared, “We will vote first; you can discuss -the matter afterward,” and the vote was promptly taken. The head of -an American corporation, moreover, is often an absolute ruler, who -determines not only the policy of the enterprise, but the personnel -of the board of directors. It was a naïve letter which a well-known -New York financier recently wrote to his “board of directors” on the -occasion of his retirement from the presidency of a great trust company -in favor of a retiring Cabinet minister. He had been looking about, -he explained, for some time for a competent successor. Now he had -found him and had chosen him. Of course the formal action of the board -would be a welcome detail; and, equally a matter of course, it was -promptly given. One of the copper kings recently testified in a legal -action that he “didn’t want to call the board of directors together -to obtain authority to buy adjacent properties.” He went ahead, did -what he pleased, and let the board discuss the matter afterward. If -there was ever so much as a question about it, it was but a profitless -interference. - - -VI - -The tendencies thus make, on the one hand, toward the centralization of -vast power in the hands of a few men--the morganization of industry, -as it were--and, on the other, toward a vast increase in the number -of those who compose the economically dependent classes. The latter -number is already stupendous. The laborers and mechanics were long ago -brought under the yoke through their divorcement from the land and the -application of steam to factory operation. They are economically unfree -except in so far as their organizations make possible a collective -bargaining for wages and hours. The growth of commerce raised up an -enormous class of clerks and helpers, perhaps the most dependent class -in the community. The growth and partial diffusion of wealth has in -fifty years largely altered the character of our domestic service and -increased the number of servants many fold. The professions, too, have -felt the change. Behind many of our important newspapers are private -commercial interests which dictate their general policy, if not, as -is frequently the case, their particular attitude upon every public -question; while the race for endowments made by the greater number of -the churches and by all colleges except a few State-supported ones, -compels a cautious regard on the part of synod and faculty for the -wishes, the views, and the prejudices of men of wealth. To this growing -deference of preacher, teacher, and editor is added that of two yet -more important classes,--the makers and the interpreters of law. The -record of legislation and judicial interpretation regarding slavery -previous to the Civil War has been paralleled, if not surpassed, in -recent years by the record of legislatures and courts in matters -relating to the lives and health of manual workers, especially in such -matters as employers’ liability and factory inspection. Thus, with a -great addition to the number of subordinate classes, with a tremendous -increase of their individual components, and with a corresponding -growth of power in the hands of a few score magnates, there is needed -little further to make up a socio-economic status that contains all the -essentials of a renascent Feudalism. - - - - -CHAPTER III OUR MAGNATES - - -With the rise of the magnates to power comes a growing -self-consciousness of their authority and responsibility. “I am a -citizen of no mean state,” is the reflection of each of them as he -looks upon the emergent order of which he is so large a part; and -thereupon it becomes his mission to live up to his rank and function. -Frequently his benefactions increase, and always he takes on a more -Jovian air, and views with a more providential outlook the phenomena -passing before and about him. He is a part not only, as Tennyson makes -Ulysses say, of all that he has met, but of the primary causes of -things. He is at once the loaf-giver to the needy, the regulator of -temporal affairs, the lord protector of church and society; and he -holds his title directly from the Creator. “The rights and interests of -the laboring man,” wrote the chief of the anthracite coal magnates last -August, “will be protected and cared for, not by the labor agitators, -but by the Christian men to whom God in His infinite wisdom has given -the control of the property interests of the country.” Gradually there -comes the renascent development of the seigniorial mind. - - -I - -“Business” is the main thought, and the apotheosis of “business” the -main cult of the new magnates. “Of gods, friends, learnings, of the -uncomprehended civilization which they overrun,” indignantly writes Mr. -Henry D. Lloyd, “they ask but one question: How much? What is a good -time to sell? What is a good time to buy?... Their heathen eyes see -in the law and its consecrated officers nothing but an intelligence -office, and hired men to help them burglarize the treasures accumulated -for a thousand years at the altars of liberty and justice, that they -may burn their marble for the lime of commerce.” - -Though a forcible, it is an extreme view, for it leaves out of -consideration the high professions of morality, the frequent appeal to -Christian ideals, the tender solicitude for honesty, integrity, law and -order, with which our new magnates gild their worship of “business.” -Such of them as have recently invaded literature give edifying glimpses -of the new seigniorial attitude. The artistic career, writes Mr. Andrew -Carnegie in his entertaining volume, “The Empire of Business,” is most -narrowing, and produces “petty jealousies, unbounded vanities, and -spitefulness”; the learned professions also produce narrowness, albeit -often a high specialization of faculty and knowledge. But “business,” -properly pursued, broadens and develops the whole man. It is a view -echoed to greater or less extent by the other literary magnates, -particularly Mr. James J. Hill, Mr. Russell Sage, Mr. S. C. T. Dodd, -Mr. John D. Rockefeller, Jr., the Hon. Marcus A. Hanna, and Mr. Charles -R. Flint. - -A flattering unction that all lay to their souls is the dictum that -success in business is a matter of honesty, intelligence, and energy. -“There is no line of business,” writes Mr. Carnegie, “in which success -is not attainable. It is a simple matter of honest work, ability, and -concentration.” “To rail against the accumulation of wealth,” writes -Mr. Sage, in the _Independent_, “is to rail against the decrees of -justice. Intelligence, industry, honesty, and thrift produce wealth.... -So long as some men have more sense and more self-control than others, -just so long will such men be wealthy, while others will be poor.” -Mr. Dodd, in his address to the students of Syracuse University, adds -this contribution: “Why is there still so much poverty? One reason is -because nature or the devil has made some men weak and imbecile and -others lazy and worthless, and neither man nor God can do much for -one who will do nothing for himself.” Mr. Rockefeller appeals both to -evolution and to divine sanction. “The growth of a large business,” -he is reported as declaring in one of his Sunday-school addresses, -“is merely a survival of the fittest.... The American Beauty rose can -be produced in the splendor and fragrance which bring cheer to its -beholder only by sacrificing the early buds which grow up around it. -This is not an evil tendency in business. It is merely the working out -of a law of nature and a law of God.” - -It matters not that many millions of men, tirelessly energetic and -reasonably intelligent, can be shown to have toiled all their lives -without winning even a competence. Nor does it matter that some of -these, in addition to being energetic and intelligent, have been -reasonably honest. To be honest, as this world goes, is to be one man -picked out of ten thousand; and the fact that most of the greater -affairs of the business world sooner or later find their way into the -courts, for the testing of the amount and quality of honesty involved -therein, might well cause some hesitation in positing this virtue as -a necessary qualification for “business.” But the notion is not to be -argued with; it is a characteristic outcropping of the seigniorial mind. - -The praise of labor is the antiphony to the praise of “business,” and -the lyres of all the magnates are strung tensely when chanting tributes -to toil. - - “Round swings the hammer of industry, quickly the sharp chisel rings, - And the heart of the toiler has throbbings that stir not the bosom - of kings,” - -warbles Mr. Flint in his article on “Combinations and Critics,” -in “The Trust: Its Book.” Toil is the foundation of wealth, they -all aver, though the rhapsodical nature of the tributes prevents a -clear and definite utterance on the question, Of _whose_ wealth is -it the foundation? But there is no lack of definiteness regarding -their attitude toward those defensive societies, the trade-unions, -which the toilers organize to secure a larger part of their product -to themselves. Mr. Flint, indeed, somewhat cautiously acknowledges -an element for good in the unions, but the general attitude of the -seigniorial mind is distinctly inimical. The recent interesting -correspondence between the coal magnates and President Mitchell is an -instance in point; so are the frequent utterances on the subject by the -president of the steel trust, and any number of examples could be given -of a like character. A crowning example of a distinctly feudal attitude -is furnished by a letter from a prominent New York merchant, printed in -the issue of June 9, 1902, of a newspaper which makes a considerable -to-do about the printing of such of the news as it sees fit to print. -The prominent merchant objects very strongly to labor leaders and -walking delegates, describing them in almost as temperate and judicial -language as that of United States District Judge Jackson. The flower of -his contribution is his seigniorial remedy for strikes:-- - -“The only remedy, in my opinion, for strikes is to get as many men as -there are officers in the different [labor] associations admitted to -their meetings, where they would have a chance to talk to the men in -a businesslike way, explaining matters to them in such a manner as to -bring the effects of a strike very plainly before them.” - -Moral suasion, however, is not the only method suggested for bringing -sense to the workers. A hint of more forcible means is occasionally -broached. A New York newspaper, which makes a boast of printing -unimpeachable interviews, reports, in its issue of July 31st last, a -significant warning from the president of the New York, Ontario and -Western Railroad. This is one of the coal-carrying railroads, and the -reference is to the anthracite strike. “After the men return to work,” -he said, “I believe that legal steps will be taken in the United States -courts against those who are responsible for the loss occasioned by the -strike.” The Hon. Abram S. Hewitt echoed this interesting suggestion -in an interview of August 25th. “The consequences of such strikes,” he -says, “are so disastrous, not merely to the parties directly concerned, -but to the whole community, that every effort should be made as soon as -the existing strike has been called off and the excitement is abated to -prevent by appropriate legislation the recurrence of such calamitous -conflicts where everybody is injured and no one is benefited.” Criminal -codes, it may be said generally, depend largely on the economic -conditions of the time and place where they obtain: horse-stealing, in -a community girdled by trolley lines, degenerates to petty larceny, -while in Wyoming or Arabia it is a capital offence. In the new order, -which requires peace and stability for its proper operation, it may -readily enough come about that voluntary leaving of work will be -severely penalized. - - -II - -The new seigniorial attitude toward government and public policy is -also significant. Often it is paternalistic in a princely degree. The -offer of a retired magnate to settle a great national problem by paying -to the Government the $20,000,000 demanded of Spain, on condition -that the Filipinos be “set free,” had in it something of the “grand -style” which Matthew Arnold so extols. The rallying to the defence of -the Government’s gold reserve by certain financiers, several years -ago, need not be instanced, since in certain quarters it is gravely -suspected that their interest was not entirely platonic. But certainly -the recent offer of a wealthy magnate to pay one-third of the cost -of repairing all the roads in the vicinity of Lakewood, N.J., showed -the true seigniorial spirit. Not different in kind, though somewhat -in degree, was the recent action of a Pittsburg magnate, on the rude -refusal of the Department of Public Works to pave his street otherwise -than with blocks at a cost of 65 cents the square yard, in doing the -thing himself at a cost of $4.50 the square yard. - -Usually, however, the seigniorial attitude toward government is -somewhat more in the direction of intervention. The seasonal migration -to Washington of representatives of all the great commercial interests -has become a salient datum in political zoölogy. Curiosity regarding a -proposed parcels post or government telegraph alone draws hundreds of -these birds of passage there. The rights of private initiative must be -maintained at any cost. In the great West one of the prime necessities -for a living is the access to water for irrigation purposes. One -may have land; but, if he has not water to irrigate it, the soil -is worthless. The prevailing sentiment is for public ownership of -waterways, since, in many places, monopoly controls the supply. At the -electrical convention held at San Francisco recently, the presiding -officer, who is also the president of a public-service corporation, -after denouncing organized labor and municipal ownership, added: -“For us a far more dangerous agitation is that which now proposes -State appropriation of all water rights. The scheme advocated makes -the appropriation little less than sheer confiscation.” Luckily the -seventy-one mile envelope of air that encases the globe yet eludes -monopolization. - -“Hands off!” is the warning to government; and though occasionally -government puts hands on, they are not very closely or tenaciously -applied. The report of the Interstate Commerce Commission (1901), -for instance, employs a rather pessimistic tone regarding government -control of traffic rates. “We simply call attention to the fact,” it -recites, “that the decision of the United States Supreme Court in the -Trans-Missouri case and the Joint Traffic Association case has produced -no practical effect upon the railway operations of the country. Such -associations, in fact, exist now, as they did before those decisions, -and with the same general effect.” “Should the Supreme Court declare -the Northern railways consolidation unconstitutional,” one of the -interested magnates is reported as saying, “we shall simply do the -thing in another way. It is something that must be done.” Cynically -frank is Mr. Dodd, in his Syracuse address, regarding the Anti-trust -law. “A modern Federal law also exists,” he says, “which, literally -interpreted, forbids business of any magnitude; but Federal judges have -thus far found it easier to dismiss proceedings under it than to guess -at its real meaning.” The president of the Southern Pacific Railroad -takes the bull by the horns, and denounces all interference. In an -interview given to the press June 2d of the present year, he declares -that “the legislation of the future must be pro-railroad instead of -anti-railroad.... I believe commissions are things of the past. I do -not think transportation companies should have to submit to dictation -or control by bodies who do not know anything about transportation.” - -The Contract-labor law is another measure, to the seigniorial mind, -unnecessary and obstructive, and its provisions, therefore, are but -lightly observed. Known evasions have been numerous; and, were the full -truth revealed, it would probably be found that this law has met with -about the same degree of observance as have the Interstate Commerce -and Anti-trust laws. As recently as July 16th, comes word from Berlin -to the Chicago _Daily News_ that “agents of American railroads are -canvassing the Polish and Slavic districts of Europe for laborers, -to whom they offer $2.50 a day and board, regardless of the Federal -Contract-labor law.” - -Not only do the magnates demand immunity from government interference -in their business affairs, but they demand also a more real, if not -a more obvious, share in the operations of government. The invasion, -during the last ten years, of the National Senate by a number of the -magnates or their legates is a part of the process; but something more -to the point is their insistence on the right to be consulted in grave -affairs by the President and Cabinet. A New York daily newspaper, -edited by the distinguished scholar who delivers lectures on journalism -before Yale University, published last February an account of a -remarkable gathering at Washington. It verges closely upon contumacy to -mention the names of the attending magnates, such is their eminence, -and they will therefore not be given. Their purpose was to protest -to the President against a repetition of his action in the Northern -Securities case. “The financiers declare,” says this newspaper, “that -they should have been notified of the intended Federal action last -week, so that they could be prepared to support the stock market, and -that their unpreparedness came very near bringing on a panic. Had -not the big interests of the street been in possession of the bulk -of securities, instead of speculators and small holders, there would -have been a panic, the capitalists assert.” It is, when considered, a -modest claim--the powers of an extra-constitutional cabinet, intrusted -with the conservation of the public peace. There is no proof that the -claim has been conceded, though some light is thrown on the problem by -the newspaper’s further declaration that the chief magnate, after an -interview with the President, “felt very much better.” - -Something of the same nature was revealed in the negotiations last -March between the Mayor of New York City and the directors of the New -York Central Railroad Company. The company requested the Mayor to -secure the withdrawal of the Wainwright bill in the State Assembly, -compelling the railroad to abandon steam in the Park Avenue tunnel by -a fixed date, and promised to do the required thing in its own time -and at its own pleasure. The letter of the Mayor to Assemblyman Bedell -records the result: “This letter [of the directors] seems to me to -lay a good foundation for the waiving a fixed date to be named in the -bill;” and the date was accordingly “waived.” - -Of the seigniorial attitude toward the police law, the abundant crop -of automobile cases alone furnishes signal testimony. Dickens made a -highly dramatic, though perhaps rather unhistorical, use in his “A Tale -of Two Cities” of the riding down of a child by a marquis, and the long -train of tragic consequences that ensued. We do the thing differently -in our day: we acquit, or at most fine the marquis, and the matter -rests; we are too deferential to carry it further. Fast driving in the -new “machines” has become one of the tests of courage, manliness, and -skill,--what jousting in full armor was in the fifteenth century, or -duelling with pistols in the early part of the nineteenth,--and if the -police law interferes, the exploit is the more hazardous and therefore -the more emulatory. The scion of a great house who recently, on being -arrested for fast driving and then bailed, subsequently sent his valet -to the police court to pay the fine, showed the true seigniorial -spirit. Possibly, though, had his identity been known before arrest, -he would have escaped the irritating interference of the law; for it -happened, about the same time, on the arrest for the same offence of a -millionnaire attorney, companioned by a Supreme Court judge, that a -too vigilant policeman came to learn his severest lesson--that to know -whom not to trouble is the better part of valor. - -At Newport, the summer home of the seigniorial class, the automobile -enforces a right of way. This is not sufficient, however, for the -automobilists, who would prefer a sole and exclusive way. In the summer -of 1901 the resident magnates fixed upon a certain Friday afternoon for -their motor races, and demanded exclusive control of Ocean, Harrison, -and Carroll avenues between the hours of two and four o’clock. In -the “grand style” characterizing the dealings of this class with the -public, the magnates offered to pay all the fines if the races led to -any prosecutions. This meant, of course, that the ordinance prohibiting -a speed greater than ten miles an hour was to be overlooked, since -the races would surely have developed speed up to forty, fifty, -and sixty miles an hour. The deferential City Council acquiesced. -For once, however, the ever serviceable injunction was found to be -available against other persons than striking workmen. A few property -owners sought refuge in the Supreme Court, a temporary injunction was -issued by Judge Wilbur, and, though the magnates hired lawyers to -fight it, the order was made permanent. It is but natural that keen -resentment should follow this high-handed action of the courts. It is -announced that some of the magnates are tiring of Newport, and one of -the wealthiest of them has recently threatened to forsake the place -entirely. - -Laws are like cobwebs, said Anacharsis the Scythian, where the -small flies are caught and the great break through. Yet that even -the great can sometimes bow to the reign of law, and particularly -that the seigniorial mind can on occasion be conciliatory, is well -illustrated by the recent action of the governors of the Automobile -Club, in suspending two members and disciplining a third, for fast -driving. The troublesome restrictions of the law on this point are -probably destined, however, to be soon abolished. Already the Board -of Freeholders of Essex County, N.J., a region much frequented by -automobilists, has advanced the speed limit in the country districts -to twenty miles per hour. Further changes are expected, and it will -probably be but a short time before a man with a “machine” will enjoy -the God-given right of “doing what he will with his own.” - - -III - -Most of the magnates show a frugal and a discriminating mind in their -benefactions; but it is a prodigal mind indeed which governs the -expenditures that make for social ostentation. It is probable that -no aristocracy--not even that of profligate Rome under the later -Cæsars--ever spent such enormous sums in display. Our aristocracy, -avoiding the English standards relating to persons engaged in trade, -welcomes the industrial magnate, and his vast wealth and love of -ostentation have set the pace for lavish expenditure. Trade is the -dominant phase of American life,--the divine process by which, -according to current opinion, “the whole creation moves,”--and, as it -has achieved the conquest of most of our social institutions and of -our political powers, that it should also dominate “society” is but a -natural sequence. Flaunting and garish consumption becomes the basic -canon in fashionable affairs. As Mr. Thorstein Veblen, in his keen -satire, “The Theory of the Leisure Class,” puts it:-- - -“Conspicuous consumption of valuable goods is a means of -reputability.... As wealth accumulates on his [the magnate’s] hands, -his own unaided effort will not avail sufficiently to put his opulence -in evidence by this method. The aid of friends and competitors is -therefore brought in by resorting to the giving of valuable presents -and expensive feasts and entertainments. Presents and feasts had -probably another origin than that of naïve ostentation, but they -acquired their utility for the purpose very early, and they have -retained that character to the present.” - -The conspicuous consumption of other days was, however, as compared -with that of the present, but a flickering candle flame to a great -cluster of electric lights. Against the few classic examples, such -as those of Cleopatra and Lucullus, our present aristocracy can show -hundreds; and the daily spectacle of wasteful display might serve to -make the earlier Sybarites stare and gasp. Present-day fashionable -events come to be distinguished and remembered not so much on the score -of their particular features as of their cost. A certain event is known -as Mr. A’s $5,000 breakfast, another as the Smith-Jones’s $15,000 -dinner, and another as Mrs. C’s $30,000 entertainment and ball. - -Conspicuous eating becomes also a feature of seigniorial life. The -“society” and the “yellow” journals are crowded with accounts of -dinners and luncheons, following one after another with an almost -incredible frequency. And not only is the frequency remarkable, but the -range and quantity of the viands furnished almost challenge belief. So -far, it is believed, the journals which usually deal in that sort of -news have neglected to give an authoritative menu for a typical day -in the life of a seigniorial family. We have dinner menus, luncheon -menus, and so on, but nothing in the way of showing what is consumed -by the individual or family during a term of twenty-four hours. Some -light on the subject, however, is furnished by Mr. George W. E. -Russell, the talented author of “Collections and Recollections,” in his -recent volume, “An Onlooker’s Note-book.” Objection may be made to the -effect that Mr. Russell is an Englishman, and that he is describing an -English royal couple. But the demurrer is irrelevant, since it is well -known that our seigniorial class founds its practices and its canons -(excepting only the canon regarding persons engaged in trade) upon -English precedents, and that English precedents are made by the Royal -Family. And not only does our home nobility imitate English models, but -it piles Pelion upon Ossa, and seeks constantly to outshine and overdo -the actions of its transatlantic cousins. Mrs. George Cornwallis-West -(formerly Lady Randolph Churchill) recently stated that the vast sums -spent by Americans in England have lifted the standard of living to a -scale of magnificence almost unknown before. So for whatever is shown -to be English custom, something must be added for American improvement -and extension when assuming its transplantation to these shores. Mr. -Russell writes:-- - -“A royal couple arranged to pay a two nights’ visit to a country house -of which the owners were friends of mine. For reasons of expediency, -we will call the visitors the duke and duchess, though that was not -their precise rank. When a thousand preparations too elaborate to be -described here had been made for the due entertainment of them and -their suite and their servants, the private secretary wrote to the lady -of the house, enclosing a written memorandum of his royal master’s and -mistress’s requirements in the way of meals. I reproduce the substance -of the memorandum--and in these matters my memory never plays tricks. -The day began with cups of tea brought to the royal bedroom. While the -duke was dressing, an egg beaten up in sherry was served to him, not -once, but twice. The duke and duchess breakfasted together in their -private sitting room, where the usual English breakfast was served to -them. They had their luncheon with their hosts and the house party, and -ate and drank like other people. Particular instructions were given -that at 5 o’clock tea there must be something substantial in the way -of eggs, sandwiches, or potted meat, and this meal the royal couple -consumed with special gusto. Dinner was at 8.30, on the limited and -abbreviated scale which the Prince of Wales introduced--two soups, two -kinds of fish, two entrées, a joint, two sorts of game, a hot and cold -sweet, and a savory, with the usual accessories in the way of oysters, -cheese, ice, and dessert. This is pretty well for an abbreviated -dinner. But let no one suppose that the royal couple went hungry to -bed. When they retired, supper was served to them in their private -sitting room, and a cold chicken and a bottle of claret were left in -their bedroom, as a provision against emergencies.” - -All the men of great wealth are not men of leisure. Some of them -work as hard as do common laborers. For such as these the tremendous -gastronomy recounted by Mr. Russell would be impossible as a daily -exercise. When, therefore, it is assumed of any of our seigniorial -class, it must be limited to magnates on vacation, to their leisurely -sons, nephews, hangers-on, and women, and to those who have retired -from active pursuits. But there are other canons of social reputability -besides personal leisure and personal wasteful consumption. These -are, to quote again from Mr. Veblen, vicarious leisure and vicarious -consumption--the leisure and lavishness of wives, sons, and daughters. -It is these who, in large part, at New York, Lenox, and Newport, -support the social reputation of their seigniorial husbands and -fathers. The “dog parties,” wherein the host “puts on a dog collar and -barks for the delectation of his guests,” the “vegetable parties,” -wherein host and guests, perhaps from some latent sense of inner -likeness, make themselves up to represent cabbage heads and other -garden products, the “monkey parties,” the various “circuses” and like -events, are given and participated in more generally by the vicarious -upholders of the magnate’s social reputation than by the seignior -himself. - -But in ways more immediate--by means which do not conflict with -his daily vocation--the working magnate gives signal example of -that virtue of capitalistic “abstinence” which is the foundation of -orthodox political economy. The splendors of his town house, his -country estate, and his steam yacht, to say nothing of his club, are -repeatedly described to us in the columns of popular periodicals. His -paintings, decorations, and bric-à-brac, his orchids and roses, his -blooded animals and his $10,000 Panhard, are depicted in terms which -make one wonder how paltry and mean must have been the possessions of -Midas and how bare the “wealth of Ormus and of Ind.” And when, for a -time, he lays down the reins of power, and betakes himself to Saratoga -or Newport or Monte Carlo, yet more wonderful accounts are given of -his lavish expenditure. The betting at the Saratoga race-tracks last -August is reported to have averaged $2,000,000 a day. “The money does -not come,” said that eminent maker of books, Mr. Joe Ullman, “from any -great plunger or group of plungers, but from the great assemblage of -rich men who are willing to bet from $100 to $1,000 on their choices -in a race.” On the transatlantic steamers, in London and in Paris, -the same prodigality is seen. A king’s ransom--or what is more to the -point, the ransom of a hundred families from a year’s suffering--is -lost or won in an hour’s play or lightly expended for some momentary -satisfaction. - - -IV - -There remain for brief mention the benefactions of the magnates. -Most of these come under the head of “conspicuous giving.” Gifts for -educational, religious, and other public purposes last year reached -the total of $107,360,000. In separate amounts they ran all the way -from the $5,000 gift of a soap or lumber magnate to the $13,000,000 -that had their origin in steel. It is an interesting list for study in -that it reveals more significantly than some of the instances given -the standards and temper of the seigniorial mind. An anonymous writer, -evidently of Jacobinical tendencies, some time ago suggested in the -columns of a well-known periodical a list of measures for the support -of which rich men might honorably and wisely devote a part of their -fortunes:-- - -“He [the rich man] could begin by requiring the assessors to hand him a -true bill of his own obligations to the public. He could continue the -good work by persuading the collector to accept a check for the whole -amount. This would make but a small draft upon his total accumulations. -A further considerable sum he could wisely devote to paying the -salaries of honorable lobbyists, who should labor with legislative -bodies to secure the enactment of just laws, which would relieve -hard-working farmers, struggling shopkeepers, mechanics trying to pay -for mortgaged houses, and widows who have received a few thousand -dollars of life insurance money, from their present obligation to -support the courts, the militia, and other organs of government that -protect the rich man’s property and enable him to collect his bills -receivable. Finally, if these two expenditures did not sufficiently -diminish his surplus, he could purchase newspapers and pay editors to -educate the public in sound principles of social justice, as applied to -taxation and to various other matters.” - -Perhaps it is not singular that no part of the gifts of the great -magnates is ever devoted to any of these purposes. Doubtless they see -no flaw, or at least no remediable defect, in the present industrial -régime. It is the régime under which they have risen to fortune and -power, and it is therefore justified by its fruits. Their benefactions -are thus always directed to a more or less obvious easement of the -conditions of those on whom the social fabric most heavily rests. -Hospitals, asylums, and libraries are the objects, though recently -a bathing beach for poor children has been added to the list. The -propriety of securing learned justification of the existing régime -causes also a considerable giving to schools, colleges, and churches. -But nowhere can there be found a seigniorial gift which, directly or -indirectly, makes for modification of the prevailing economic system. - - - - -CHAPTER IV OUR FARMERS AND WAGE-EARNERS - - -The increasing dependence of middleman and petty manufacturer has -already been considered. The same pressure which bears upon these bears -also upon farmer and wage-earner. The editorials and the oratory of -election years, it is true, supply us with recurring pæans over the -independence, the self-reliance and the prosperity of these classes, -and such graphic tropes as “the full dinner pail” and “the overflowing -barn,” become the party shibboleths of political campaigns. Plain -facts, however, accord but ill with this exultant strain. - - -I - -In most ages the working farmer has been the dupe and prey of the rest -of mankind. Now by force and now by cajolery, as social customs and -political institutions change, he has been made to produce the food -by which the race lives, and the share of his product which he has -been permitted to keep for himself has always been pitifully small. -Whether Roman slave, Frankish serf, or English villein; whether the -so-called “independent” farmer of a free democracy or the _ryot_ of -a Hindu prince, the general rule holds good. Occasionally, by one -means or another, he gains some transitory betterment of condition; -the Plague of 1349 and the Peasants’ Rebellion of 1381 won for his -class advantages which were retained during three generations. But in -the long run he is the race’s martyr. Under a military autocracy his -exploitation was inevitable. There is no reason for it now, for the -lives and well-being of the rest of mankind are in his hands: were -the working farmers organized as the manufacturers and the skilled -artisans are organized, and could they lay by for themselves a year’s -necessities, they could starve the race into submission to their -demands. But the thing is not to be; nor, indeed, is any marked change -to their advantage likely to happen, for, so far as current tendencies -point, the future is to repeat the past. - -In our day and in our land both force and cajolery conspire to keep -the peasant farmer securely in his traces. He cannot break through -the cordon which the trusts and the railroads put about him; and even -if he could he would not, since the influences showered upon him are -specifically directed to the end of keeping him passive and contented. -Our statisticians assure him of his prosperity; our politicians and -our moulders of opinion warn him of the pernicious influence of -unions like the Farmers’ Alliance, and further preach to him the -comforting doctrine that by “raising more corn and less politics” -he will ultimately work out a blissful salvation. Sometimes he must -burn his corn for fuel; often he cannot sell his grain for the cost -of production, even though many thousands of persons in the great -cities may be hungering for it; frequently he cannot afford to send -his children to school, and in a steadily increasing number of cases -he is forced to abandon his farm and become a tenant or a wanderer. He -is puzzled, no doubt, by these things; but they are all carefully and -neatly explained to him from the writings and preachments of profound -scholars, as “natural” and “inevitable” phenomena. His ethical sense -may be somewhat disturbed by the explanations, but he learns that it is -useless to protest, and he thereupon acquiesces. - -A sort of symposium on the joys of the farmer is to be found in the -September number of the _American Review of Reviews_. Mr. Clarence -H. Matson writes of improved conditions due to rural free delivery -of mails and a few other reforms; Mr. William R. Draper dilates upon -the enormous revenues which have flowed to the farmers during the -current year, and Professor Henry C. Adams contributes a symphony -on the diffusion of agricultural prosperity. A fourth article, by -Mr. Cy Warman, furnishes a rather discordant note to the general -harmony, since it shows a large and increasing immigration of our -prosperous farmers into Canada. Some 20,000 crossed the border last -year, according to Mr. Warman, while during the first four months of -1902, 11,480 followed, and indications pointed to a total of 40,000 -emigrants for the present year. The official figures of the Canadian -Government, since published, partly confirm these estimates. The -number of immigrants from the United States for the year ended June -30, 1902, was 22,000. The number for the current year will probably -be larger, for according to a Montreal press despatch of September -17th: “The immigration from the American to the Canadian Northwest has -assumed much greater proportions this year than ever before, and land -sales to Americans are daily reported. The latest large sale is by -the Saskatchewan Valley Land Company, which has sold 100,000 acres in -Saskatchewan to an American syndicate for $500,000.” - -“The American farmer,” sententiously and truthfully remarks Professor -Adams, “does not hoard his cash.” He gives no reason for the fact, and -the determination must be left to the reader. “The American farmer,” -he further remarks, “is, as a rule, his own landlord.” This statement -reveals a very serious misapprehension of the facts. Something more -than every third farm in the United States, according to the recent -census, is operated by a tenant. Moreover, the proportion of tenants -is constantly rising. For the whole country, tenants operated 25.5 per -cent of all farms in 1880, 28.4 per cent in 1890, and 35.3 per cent in -1900. Further, the tendency is not confined to particular sections, -but is common to the whole country. During the last decade the number -of tenant-operated farms increased relatively to the whole number of -farms in every State and Territory except Maine, Vermont, and New -Hampshire. In Maine tenantry decreased seven-tenths of 1 per cent, in -New Hampshire five-tenths of 1 per cent, and in Vermont one-tenth of 1 -per cent. For the twenty-year period, as was pointed out in Chapter II, -the only exceptions to the general increase are Arizona, Florida, and -New Hampshire. - -The recent census, out of its abundant optimism, does not segregate -these facts, and makes no general comment other than that tenantry has -increased and that salaried management is believed to be “constantly -increasing.” The bulletin on “Agriculture: The United States” does not -even furnish a general classified summary of the data on tenantry. But -the separate reports give the statistics, and out of them the following -table is compiled:-- - -INCREASE OF FARM TENANTRY - - ==========================+========+========+=======+=======+ - | - STATES AND TERRITORIES | PER CENT OF FARMS OPERATED - | BY TENANTS - --------------------------+----------+--------+-------------+ - | 1880 | 1890 | 1900 - | | | - 1. Alabama | 46.8 | 48.6 | 57.7 - 2. Arizona | 13.2 | 7.9 | _a._ 8.4[1] - | | | _b._ 11.9[2] - 3. Arkansas | 30.9 | 32.1 | 45.4 - 4. California | 19.8 | 17.8 | 23.1 - 5. Colorado | 13.0 | 11.3 | 22.6 - 6. Connecticut | 10.2 | 11.5 | 12.9 - 7. Delaware | 42.4 | 46.9 | 50.3 - 8. District of Columbia | 38.2 | 36.7 | 43.1 - 9. Florida | 30.9 | 23.6 | 26.5 - 10. Georgia | 44.9 | 53.5 | 59.9 - 11. Idaho | 4.7 | 4.6 | 8.7 - 12. Illinois | 21.4 | 24.0 | 29.3 - 13. Indiana | 23.7 | 25.4 | 28.6 - 14. Iowa | 23.8 | 28.1 | 34.9 - 15. Kansas | 16.3 | 28.2 | 33.2 - 16. Kentucky | 26.4 | 24.9 | 32.8 - 17. Louisiana | 35.2 | 44.4 | 58.0 - 18. Maine | 4.3 | 5.4 | 4.7 - 19. Maryland | 31.0 | 31.0 | 33.6 - 20. Massachusetts | 8.2 | 9.3 | 9.6 - 21. Michigan | 10.0 | 14.0 | 15.9 - 22. Minnesota | 9.2 | 12.9 | 17.3 - 23. Mississippi | 43.8 | 52.8 | 62.4 - 24. Missouri | 27.3 | 26.8 | 30.5 - 25. Montana | 5.3 | 4.8 | 9.2 - 26. Nebraska | 18.0 | 24.7 | 36.9 - 27. Nevada | 9.7 | 7.5 | 11.4 - 28. New Hampshire | 8.1 | 8.0 | 7.5 - 29. New Jersey | 24.6 | 27.2 | 36.9 - 30. New Mexico | 8.1 | 4.5 | 9.4 - 31. New York | 16.5 | 20.2 | 23.9 - 32. North Carolina | 33.5 | 34.1 | 41.4 - 33. North Dakota | 3.9[3] | 6.9 | 8.5 - 34. Ohio | 19.3 | 22.9 | 27.5 - 35. Oklahoma | | 0.7 | 21.0 - 36. Oregon | 14.1 | 12.5 | 17.8 - 37. Pennsylvania | 21.2 | 23.3 | 26.0 - 38. Rhode Island | 19.9 | 18.7 | 20.1 - 39. South Carolina | 50.3 | 55.3 | 61.0 - 40. South Dakota | 3.9[3] | 13.2 | 21.8 - 41. Tennessee | 34.5 | 30.8 | 40.5 - 42. Texas | 37.6 | 41.9 | 49.7 - 43. Utah | 4.6 | 5.2 | 8.8 - 44. Vermont | 13.4 | 14.6 | 14.5 - 45. Virginia | 29.5 | 26.9 | 30.7 - 46. Washington | 7.2 | 8.5 | 14.4 - 47. West Virginia | 19.1 | 17.8 | 21.8 - 48. Wisconsin | 9.1 | 11.4 | 13.5 - 49. Wyoming | 2.8 | 4.2 | 7.6 - --------------------------+----------+--------+-------------+ - - FOOTNOTES: - - [1] Including Indian farms. - - [2] Excluding Indian farms. - - [3] Dakota Territory. - -There were 2,026,286 tenants in 1900, an increase in twenty years of -97.7 per cent. There were 3,713,371 owners, part owners, “owners and -tenants,” and managers, an increase in twenty years of 24.4 per cent. -During the twenty-year period owners in Washington increased less -than fivefold, tenants tenfold. Utah shows a doubling of the number -of owners, and a quadrupling of the number of tenants. South Dakota, -compared with Dakota Territory in 1880, reveals an increase of owners -of two and one-half times; of tenants, eighteen times. There are 28,669 -fewer owners in New York State than in 1880, and 14,331 more tenants. -Ownership has declined and tenantry advanced, both absolutely and -relatively, in New Jersey. The great farming State of Illinois has -15,044 fewer owners and 23,454 more tenants than in 1880, and even -the young Territory of Oklahoma, wherein one might expect to find -evidences of increased ownership, reveals, for the ten-year period, a -two-hundred-fold increase of tenantry and only a sixfold increase of -ownership. - -From the foregoing table it will be seen that while during the previous -decade relative tenantry declined slightly in several States, the -tide has since turned. Though the Southern States generally show the -greatest proportion of tenants, the greatest percentage of increase is -revealed in the Border, Northern, and Western States. Tenants operate -62.4 per cent of all the farms of Mississippi, 61 per cent of those of -South Carolina. But while the former is a growth since 1880 from 43.8 -per cent, and the latter from 50.3 per cent, Oklahoma (the comparison -in this single instance is with 1890) increased the percentage of its -tenant-operated farms from seven-tenths of 1 per cent to 21 per cent. -Washington doubled its percentage, Montana and Utah very nearly so. -Nearly one-third of the farms of New Jersey are tenant farms, and -more than one-third of those of Kansas and Nebraska. Each of these -three States doubled its relative percentage of tenant farmers for the -twenty-year period. Even in New York the proportion has grown since -1880 from 16.5 to 23.9 per cent. As marked as is the showing, the whole -situation is not revealed by the figures, for the term “owners” in the -reports includes “farms operated by individuals who own a part of the -land and rent the remainder from others,” and “farms operated under the -joint direction and by the united labor of two or more individuals, one -owning the farm or a part of it, and the other or others owning no part -but receiving for supervision or labor a share of the products.” - -This remarkable growth of tenantry would be considered, in any other -than our own complacent days, as an alarming, even an appalling fact. -So blithely and for so long a time have the changes been rung upon -the alleged fact of independent ownership that everybody, including -professors of political economy, assumes its truth. But even when its -baselessness is clearly shown we shall hear little of an alarmist -nature from our publicists and teachers. Rather it may be expected -that their pronouncements will change with the changing times, and -that we shall soon hear reiterated gratulations on the development -of tenantry. Is not the humble tenant’s security greater, are not -his troubles less? Need he worry over taxes, foreclosures, and the -like? Not at all; and besides--not the least of considerations to -our paternalistic moulders of opinion--there is much reason for -satisfaction in the fact that, having no land to mortgage, he will not -be led into wildly prodigal habits of life by a too ready recourse to -the money-lender. - -Considering the growth of tenantry, the increasing migration to Canada, -the flocking of rural residents into the cities, and the frequent -outright abandonment of farms in several sections of the country, -the unsophisticated onlooker may naturally wonder at the tales of -agricultural prosperity which from time to time appear in public print. -Mr. Draper, in the article previously mentioned, speculates somewhat -ingeniously over the financial returns due the farmer for his crop for -the present year. The figures are certainly imposing when looked at as -totals. The wheat crop will sum up 700,500,000 bushels, and each bushel -will sell for 60 cents, making the net value $580,100,000--a rather -curious result, by the way, not obtainable by any of the ordinary -processes of mathematics. The corn crop is to bring $776,985,300, and -the remaining crops follow, with large values attached. - -But reduced to individual earnings, values of farm products (according -to the census, products other than those fed to live stock) reveal a -rather meagre diffusion of prosperity. Of the 5,739,657 farms in the -United States, 1,319,856 are listed in the census as hay and grain -farms, for the reason that hay and grain comprise 40 per cent of -their total products. The average size of these hay and grain farms -is 159.3 acres, and the average value of this product per acre in -1899 was $4.77. The number of miscellaneous farms is 1,059,416, with -an average acreage of 106.8, and a product value of $4.12. Live-stock -farms number 1,564,714, with an average acreage of 226.9 and a product -value of $3.47. Thus the average productive yield of 70 per cent of all -the farms and 80 per cent of all the farm land in the nation ranges -from $3.47 to $4.77 per acre. Flowers and plants, it may be noted for -comparison, yield the comfortable return of $431.83 per acre; but their -effect on the general census is but slight, since the average product -value of all farms is but $4.47 per acre. But let no one suppose that -all this munificent sum goes to the farmer. He pays 43 cents per acre -for labor and nearly 7 cents per acre for fertilizers. The net income -is thus $3.97 per acre. - -The size of farms is increasing, though actual agriculture is probably -confined to smaller holdings. The average was 136.5 acres in 1890; -it is now 146.6 acres. The tendency varies in different parts of the -country. Nebraska increases her average from 190.1 acres in 1890 to -246.1 acres in 1900. Kansas shows almost identical figures, while -the New England States show little change, and the Southern States -generally show reduced averages. The relation of size of farm to kind -of tenure is, however, the main point, and here one discovers matter -for reflection. Farms operated by cash tenants have 102.7 acres apiece, -by owners 134.1, by managers 1514.3. The growth of manorial estates -is dimly revealed in these figures, and there is no need to doubt the -census bulletin’s reserved admission that farms operated by managers -are believed to be constantly increasing. - -The subject of the changing status of the farmer--a change which -involves his ultimate reduction to a sixteenth-century level--is -too large to receive adequate treatment in these pages. By all -considerations it deserves the space of a generous volume. For present -purposes there remains to be said that even where apparent ownership is -retained by the working farmer, effective ownership is determined in -other quarters. He is the joint tenant of the farm implement trusts, -of the new harvester trust, of the produce trusts which fix the -value of his products, of the railroad trusts which fix the rate of -transportation to the market, and in the arid West of the water trusts. -Thus, even though he boasts the possession of a title-deed to his land, -the holding is in reality of the nature of a fief, held at the mercy of -several superiors; and the tithes which he pays, though less formally -levied and exacted than were the _redevances_ of the mediæval peasant, -are as many and well-nigh as burdensome. And he must pay or go; for -there is no remission from his superiors, as in olden days, on account -of drouth, floods, locusts, or murrain. - - -II - -With the decline of the petty trades, the growth of the combinations, -and the concentration in fewer hands of the machinery of production, -the subordination of the wage-earner becomes more certain and more -fixed. If ever he were a free agent,--in the sense and to the degree -that any one in human society can be free,--the day is passed. Through -agencies constantly augmenting and extending, he is “cabin’d, cribb’d, -confin’d, bound in,” to a narrowing circle of possible efforts. -Divorced from the land and from the tools of production, he can live -only by accepting such wages and conditions as are offered him; and -the terms are always such that the kernel of his product goes to some -other man, while the husks and the tares remain his own portion. The -patronizing orators of Labor Day and of campaign times sometimes -delight to symbolize him as a sturdy Gulliver, though it needs little -reflection to see that it is the Gulliver of Brobdingnag, and not that -of Lilliput, that more correctly figures his present status. The mass -of current tendencies tends to fix him as a dependent--a unit of a -lower order in a series of gradations running up to the Big Men. “The -corporation,” writes Mr. Richmond,[4] “holds of the State, and its -officers hold of the corporation, and their retainers, managers, and -servants all hold the tenure of their employment from their superiors -in office, from the highest to the lowest.” But whether corporation, or -partnership, or individual, employs the laborer’s services, his status -is practically the same. Trade-unions and other labor societies tend to -modify that dependence; and occasionally social legislation, when it -runs the fierce gantlet of the courts, exerts a further modification. -But it is coming to be recognized that there is a limit, perhaps -now nearly attained, beyond which the labor societies can exert no -influence; and as for social legislation, as will be shown farther -along, it has certainly reached its culmination. - -To the natural causes making for the laborer’s subordination have been -added in recent years certain conscious and deliberate forces. There -is a collective pressure brought to bear upon his wages; there is a -collective antagonism maintained against his unions; there is a growing -movement in the direction of holding him for the term of his profitable -service to the company or corporation by which he is employed, and -there is a judicial tendency to pretend still to regard him, despite -his changing status, as an economically free agent, able to do what he -wills, and to protect himself from all injustice. - - -III - -The assurance of villein fidelity is a prime need of a feudal order. -The fidelity need not be personal, as in the old days; instead, the -altered ceremony of “homage” may take in whole regiments by a single -rite. Recent acts of the great employers make strongly for creating -inducements for this fidelity. In spite of instances of conduct like -that of the coal magnates of Pennsylvania, there is a growing tendency -to unite for life-long service the careers of the more faithful workers -with the corporations by whom they are employed. “Model workshops,” -and even “model villages,” are unquestionably increasing in numbers. -Their character is almost pure paternalism--“enlightened absolutism,” -Professor Ely calls it. Rarely have the workers themselves the -slightest word to say as to their construction or conduct. What is -thought to be good for them, what is thought will win their devotion, -is given them. Whether at Pullman, Ill., at Dayton or Cleveland, -Ohio, or at Pelzer, S.C., the general spirit manifested is the same. -The perfervid chapter on “American Liberality to Workmen,” which -Mr. Nicholas Paine Gilman gives us in his volume, “A Dividend to -Labor,” contains dozens of instances wherein employers have indulged -their benevolence by the gift of flower-pots, wash-basins, and other -cultural paraphernalia to their employees. Mr. Victor H. Olmsted, -in the _Bulletin_ of the Department of Labor for November, 1900, -gives another, though somewhat duplicated, list; and the Rev. Josiah -Strong’s monthly journal, _Social Service_, furnishes a current record -of such benevolences. The providences of the Colorado Fuel and Iron -Company alone make a remarkable showing. This corporation has even a -“sociological department,” and it is at present building a $10,000 -mission at Bessemer, near Pueblo. The plan of the mission, we read, -is to have a refuge, with all modern improvements, for “floaters,” or -the unemployed. These wayfarers may make a temporary living by working -in an attached woodyard. In all its camps in Colorado this company has -established kindergartens, libraries, and, in remote places, grade -schools for the children of its employees. Its hospital at the Pueblo -works is said to be the best equipped in the West. “It is the announced -purpose of this corporation,” we read, “to solve the social problem.” - -Model workshops and the distribution of relief are but a small part -of the tendency. The giving of old-age pensions, particularly by -railroad companies, has recently taken on the dimensions of a national -movement. The pension system is not a conspicuously expensive one, -for the numbers of workmen who live long enough to avail themselves -of its benefits are but scant. The sums paid out for pensions by the -Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Relief Department in eighteen years average -$31,185.85 yearly--about the salary of a first vice-president--and the -employees themselves have borne a considerable part of the expense. A -total of 697 pensions has been granted during this time, but 365 of the -beneficiaries have considerately died, and thus reduced the expenses. - -The pension system as it obtains among railroads is more or less an -outgrowth of the relief association begun by the Baltimore and Ohio -Railroad Company on May 1, 1880. Prototypes can possibly be found, -but this instance is the first of any consequence. The State of -Maryland revoked the charter of the association in 1888. This was an -embarrassing interruption, but by no means a fatal one, for the society -was immediately reorganized as a department of the company. The plan -was to pay accident, sick, and death benefits and old-age pensions, -the company contributing $33,500 yearly, and the employees paying -monthly dues based on their wages. Section 100 of the regulations -for 1889 declares that “the fund for the payment of pensions will be -derived wholly from the contributions of the company,” a change from -the earlier method in the direction of pure paternalism. The usual age -for pensioning is sixty-five years, and the president and directors -determine the roll. - -The Pennsylvania Railroad Voluntary Relief Department was begun in -1886. In a number of respects it followed the details of the earlier -association. As to pensions, however, it put the matter forward by -arranging for the gradual growth of a superannuation fund out of -the department’s surplus. There were six companies, according to -Mr. William Franklin Willoughby’s “Workingmen’s Insurance,” that -before 1898 had created regular insurance departments. These were -the Baltimore and Ohio, the Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania west of -Pittsburg, the Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy, the Philadelphia and -Reading, and the Plant System. Though in two or three instances the -plans have been altered, all these companies founded their pension -systems on employees’ contributions. - -The Pennsylvania’s fund reached the figure set for it January 1, 1900, -and the pension system was proclaimed. On the first day of 1901 the -Chicago and Northwestern put in operation a gratuitous pension system, -appropriating $200,000 for the purpose. The beneficiaries, all of whom -must have been thirty years with the company, were divided into two -classes: first, those seventy years old, who were to be retired and -pensioned at once; and second, those from sixty-five to sixty-nine -years inclusive, who were to be retired and pensioned at the discretion -of the pension board. The rate fixed is one per cent per year of -service of the average monthly pay for the preceding ten years. An -employee whose average wages were $55 per month, and who had been with -the company for thirty years, would thus receive $16.50 a month. - -The Illinois Central proclaimed its pension system July 1, 1901. On -March 1, 1902, the Delaware, Lackawanna, and Western took the same -course, appropriating $50,000. The terms are somewhat more liberal, -in that only twenty-five years’ service is required, and that some -employees may be retired between the ages of sixty and sixty-five. The -Metropolitan Street Railway Company followed on March 6th, and the -Philadelphia and Reading Company on May 21. The details, while varying -somewhat, are in the main alike for all of these companies. - -Though the experiment is a comparatively frugal one, there is no doubt -that it brings compensatory returns; for it serves to keep quiescent -and faithful large bodies of men, and perhaps to loosen the bonds of -the labor-union. It holds in servicemen above thirty-five or forty-five -years of age, for they know the difficulty of securing work elsewhere; -and it feeds them with a more or less illusory hope of an ultimate -pension. Indeed, the motive of inducing a closer dependence of the -laborer upon the employer is more or less frankly confessed. “Under -it” (the pension system), reads the Lackawanna’s advertisement to the -public, “the road and its employees are to be more closely knit by -substantial ties.” The president of the Metropolitan Street Railway -Company, however, sounds a more altruistic and benevolent note. “My -object in establishing this department,” he is quoted as saying, “is -to preserve the future welfare of aged and infirm employees and to -recognize efficient and loyal service.” - -Despite such benevolent professions there are grave grounds for -scepticism regarding the tangible benefit of the system to the -employees. If Hope lingers with them, it must be because, as Mr. -William Watson sings, “airiest cheer suffices for her food.” For both -the ascertained results of an eighteen years’ operation of the system, -and a moment’s glance at conditions surrounding the new applications of -it, point to a most rigorous limitation of its benefits. In the first -place, there is a growing disinclination to employ in any industry men -past forty-five years of age. The new regulations of the Philadelphia -and Reading reduce even this limit ten years, prohibiting the taking -on of employees past thirty-five years of age, except by the approval -of the board of directors of the company, although in special cases -where unusual qualifications are desired the age limit may be waived. -So general is this attitude of employers that the Chicago Federation -of Labor was recently moved to the passing of a resolution proposing -that “every unemployed man forty-five years of age who cannot show -what the charity authorities call ‘visible means of support’ shall -be mercifully shot in a lawful and orderly manner.” Moreover, the -chances of a railroad employee reaching the age of sixty-five or -seventy years are about equal to the chances of winning a large sum at -policy. Discharges are frequent and arbitrary, and usually there is no -appeal. Aside from this, the casualties are enormous. Of the 191,198 -railroad workers classed as trainmen employed throughout the country -in 1900, 1396 (or one in every 138) were killed, and 17,571 (or one -in every 10.8) injured. The corrected figures for 1901 (given to the -public in August of the present year) show about the same percentages. -Of the 209,043 trainmen, 1537 (or one in every 136) were killed, and -16,715 (or one in every 12.5) were injured. Thanks to the new safety -appliances, casualties caused by coupling and uncoupling cars declined -by 84 killed and 2461 injured; but in other classes of accidents the -percentages brought the averages to near the previous figures. At best, -the chances of maiming or death constantly increase with every one of -the twenty-five or thirty years’ service required for the earning of a -pension. In the Metropolitan (now Interurban) Street Railway service, -where accidents are few but discharges many, the benevolent instincts -of the president will prove difficult of realization. This official -admitted that discharges had at one time reached an average of 300 a -month. An employee informed the author that he knew of but two or -three men in the entire service whom the published terms entitled to -pensions, while another employee conceded a possible dozen. - - -IV - -The new Feudalism evidently requires a tempering--let us say, a -conservative adjustment--of the wage-scale. Those whom the gods dower -with plenty may for the present give freely of their store, while those -who feel the parsimony of Providence must withhold. The recent increase -of 10 per cent in wages given by the steel corporation, and the refusal -of the anthracite magnates to increase the average, according to -the Pennsylvania Bureau of Mines, of 79-1/2 cents a day which their -operatives now receive, are but examples of the contrasts which may be -expected during the transition period. The collective feudal policy -will avoid both extremes. It will pay something better than that which -breeds discontent, something less than that which breeds luxury and -pride. It will provide not exactly what the workers desire, but what is -good for them. - -Already the more or less collective pressure upon the wage-scale shows -its effects. Hon. Carroll D. Wright’s 250 wage-quotations for 25 -selected occupations (_Bulletin_ of the Department of Labor, September, -1898) reveal for the years 1895-98 a steady decline from the wages paid -in the panic years, 1893-94, to about the same wages as were paid in -1882. The figures in the _Bulletin_ for September, 1900, pertain to -148 establishments, representing 26 industries and 192 occupations. -They show a slight increase for 1899 and another for 1900. This slight -increase, however, is resolved into a marked decrease by the rise in -the price of commodities necessary for the average life. From July, -1897, to July, 1901, according to the careful index-figures published -in _Dun’s Review_, the price of commodities advanced 27 per cent; and -from July 1 to December 1, of the latter year, an almost steady advance -was recorded. Comparing January 1, 1896, with January 1, 1902, the -_Wall Street Journal_ finds an increase of 36 per cent. - -The wage-quotations used by Col. Wright in his table of 1898 are -from the larger cities, and pertain to trades the workmen in which -are organized. Here, if anywhere, one would expect evidences of -increased wages. Generally, however, the figures for 1897-98 show -a parity with the figures for 1881-82. Compositors, for instance, -received $2.81-1/2 daily in 1898, $2.81 in 1882. Carpenters received -$2.52-3/4 in 1898, $2.55 in 1882. Often the figures for the latter -year show a considerable decline; but the averages are maintained -through the advances gained by those affluent mechanics, the plumbers; -by the stone-cutters, and by the better-paid wage-earners of the -railroads,--conductors, engineers, and firemen. With the increase -of railroad traffic the hours of labor have been extended; and the -increase of wages follows, at least for the engineers and firemen, as -a consequence of longer hours. As for the common laborer, he is being -left behind in the race. His wages were less in 1898 than in 1882 in -six of the ten cites quoted, and in four of them there was no change. - -All wage-statistics are questionable, and particularly the more -generalized wage-statements which proceed from Washington, during the -fall months of election years. A look into the figures themselves is -usually fatal to the optimism voiced in the generalizations. From -other sources the conflict of figures is puzzling and irritating. It -may be shown by selections from these that wages are rising, that they -are falling, or that they are stationary. There is always a disparity -between the figures of the State bureaus, the National bureau, and the -census, and usually it is a disparity that cannot be harmonized. - -The national census figures ought to be, as most persons will declare, -a sufficiently correct guide. According to the last census, the -number of wage-earners in manufacturing pursuits has increased in ten -years 25.2 per cent, wages have increased 23.2 per cent. Despite the -acknowledged increase in the country’s wealth, wages, if the census -is correct, have declined. It is officially explained, however, that -these figures are not to be taken too literally. The schedules for -1890 included among wage-earners, “overseers, foremen, and certain -superintendents (not general superintendents or managers), while the -census of 1900 separates from the wage-earning class such salaried -employees as general superintendents, clerks, and salesmen.” “It is -possible and probable,” says each of the reports on manufactures, “that -this change in the form of the question has resulted in eliminating -from the wage-earners, as reported by the present census, many -high-salaried employees included in that group for the census of 1890.” - -Possibly and probably. But aside from the fact that the elimination -of the comparatively few overseers and foremen, with their somewhat -higher salaries, could make but slight influence on averages in the -tremendous total of 5,321,087 wage-earners, with $2,330,275,021 of -wages, there is another point or two to consider. According to Part -I (page 14 _et seq._) of the Report of Manufacturing Industries for -the census of 1890, it appears that wages underwent a considerable -inflation in that record. The questions asked in 1880, it would appear, -resulted in reporting more wage-earners than there really were. The -questions for 1890, it is declared, produced the real number. It is -further stated that “the questions for 1890 also tended to obtain a -large amount of wages as compared with 1880.” It would seem so, indeed, -even to a neophyte in the ingenious art of figuring; for while the -wage-increase of the decade 1870-80 could show but 22.2 per cent, that -for the following decade revealed the astonishing figure of a fraction -less than 100 per cent. When, therefore, one seeks to compare the -averages of 1890 with those of 1900 he may not unreasonably infer that -the elimination of overseers and foremen in the later census is no more -than a set-off to the ample generosity given to the wage-figures in -the earlier census. There is no telling for a certainty, but it is not -unlikely that the present census figures give a result approximately -near the truth. - -It is not an extravagant hope that some day we shall have two -successive censuses carried out on identical schedules, so that -comparisons may be accurately made between two decades. As it is, we -must take what the powers give us, and be thankful. We must take it -on trust, moreover, for there is no going behind the returns; and any -captious questioning of the figures can be met only in the spirit with -which Telemachus answered the fair Helen’s inquiry if he were a true -son of Ulysses. It is a matter of faith--there is no proof. - -In the faith, then, that there is reasonable accuracy in the reports, -and a reasonable basis of comparison with previous reports, it is -interesting to note what is revealed. First in point of interest is -the relation of the value of the manufactured product to the amount -of wages paid. A comparison will show whether labor is receiving an -increasing or decreasing share of the wealth created. The census -totals under the former heading are confessedly crude, since “a -constant duplication of products appears, ... owing to the fact that -the finished products of many manufacturing establishments become the -materials of other establishments, in which they are further utilized -and again included in the value of products.” The new census has -therefore made a separate classification of materials purchased in a -partially manufactured form. Nevertheless, the gross total, including -products from both raw materials and partly manufactured products, is -reached by the same means as were employed in previous censuses, and -is therefore comparable with the gross totals of previous decades. -Whatever the duplications, they are similar to those of preceding -reports. - -There are nineteen States wherein the average number of wage-earners -in manufacturing pursuits constitutes more than 6 per cent of the -population. Rhode Island heads the list with 22.5 per cent. It is -followed by Connecticut with 19.5; Massachusetts, 17.7; New Hampshire, -17.1; New Jersey, 12.8; Delaware, 12; New York, 11.7; Pennsylvania, -11.6; Maine, 10.8; Maryland, 9.1; Vermont, 8.6; Ohio, 8.3; Illinois, -8.2; Florida, 7; Wisconsin, 6.9; Michigan, 6.7; Washington, 6.6; -Indiana, 6.2; California, 6.1. - -In each of these States the value of the manufactured product has -increased, Florida leading with a gain of 109.6 per cent; Washington -following with 107.8 per cent; New Jersey with 72.5; Indiana, 66.7; -Vermont, 50.4; Wisconsin, 45.2, and so on, Massachusetts showing the -slightest increase, 16.6 per cent. The value of the manufactured -product is of course affected by the two items, cost of material and -miscellaneous expenses, though in turn these are almost invariably -reflected to some extent in the increase or decrease of the value -of the product. When his material and his expenses increase, the -manufacturer, if he can, puts up the price of his product. It would be -wholly impossible to find a ratio, for the figures show an astonishing -variety. In Massachusetts, for instance,--that classic State for the -observation and study of industrial phenomena, the State wherein -statistics are gathered with some approach to accuracy,--the increase -of miscellaneous expenses is put at 16.1 per cent; of cost of material, -at 16.8 per cent; of value of product, 16.6 per cent. But against -this reasonable showing New York confesses to an increase of 81.8 -per cent in miscellaneous expenses, with an increased product of but -27.1 per cent. Miscellaneous expenses increased 131 per cent in New -Jersey, while the product increased but 72.5 per cent, and Pennsylvania -and Indiana follow hard in the tracks of the two former States. -Perhaps a key to the mystery is furnished in the enormous increase of -miscellaneous expenses in certain industries which require favorable -legislation. Gas, for instance, which is generally considered the -rightful prey of certain kinds of aldermen and legislators, shows a -payment of $8,635,399 for “advertising, interest, insurance, repairs, -and other sundry expenses,” an increase of 74.8 per cent against an -increase in the value of the product of but 32.9 per cent. - -In each of these nineteen factory States the value of the product -increased. In all but one it increased more than 25 per cent, in two -more than 100 per cent. But in ten of these States total wages have -declined, and in three of the remainder the gain is insignificant. -Wages of men workers have declined in eleven of these States, with -a fractional gain in two States. Florida, which shows the greatest -percentage of increase in the number of wage-earners, shows the -greatest relative loss in wages. Maine, which gives the smallest -percentage of increase in number of wage-earners, gives the largest -relative percentage of increase in wages. The four States having -the greatest absolute number of wage-earners all show decreases of -wages. New York, with 849,092 workers, shows a wage-loss of 2.2 per -cent; Pennsylvania, with 733,834 workers, a loss of 2 per cent; -Massachusetts, with 497,448, a fractional loss; and Illinois, with -395,110, 5 per cent. - -The specific industries for the whole nation show similar results. -Relative wages have increased in refining petroleum, in manufacturing -ice and salt, and in a few other industries. But they have decreased -in the great majority of the industries so far reported. There is -a wage-loss in the making of bicycles, leather gloves and mittens, -watches, watch-cases, buttons, gas, oleomargarine, boots and shoes, -paper and pulp, coke, needles and pins, cigars and cigarettes, -pocket-books, trunks and valises, leather belting and hose, in canning -and preserving fruits and vegetables, in the tanning and finishing of -leather, the slaughtering and packing of meat, the smelting of zinc, -ship-building, car-building, the weaving of flax, hemp, and jute, and -cotton products, the brewing of malt liquors, and newspaper publishing. -All along the monotonous rows of figures the same lesson is generally -revealed,--the productivity of the laborer increases, the value of the -product increases, the wages, except in occasional instances, decline -or remain stationary. - -The important point of the purchasing power of the dollar in 1890 -as compared with 1900 needs also to be considered. According to the -exhaustive compilation of wholesale prices published in the _Bulletin_ -of the Department of Labor for March, 1902, the dollar would purchase -in 1890 a greater quantity of beef, bacon, ham, corn meal, beans, -cheese, eggs, pepper, American salt, Formosa tea, hard and soft coal, -petroleum, earthenware, furniture, and glassware than in 1900. In the -latter year it would purchase more butter, Rio coffee, dried fruits -(except currants), rice, sugar, onions, potatoes, mutton, and fish. -Wheat flour cheapened, but the price of bread remained the same. -A comparison of the two lists on the basis of relative quantities -consumed in the average family will show the dollar to have had -considerably less purchasing power in 1900 than in 1890, though the -exact percentage is hardly computable. - - -V - -The new Feudalism involves not only the moderating of the present rates -of pay for men workers, but an increase in the quantity of defenceless -labor--the labor of women and children. Census Bulletin No. 150 gives -the increase in the number of men working in manufacturing pursuits at -23.9 per cent; of women, at 28.4 per cent; of children, at 39.5 per -cent. The wages of women have slightly increased; that is, the increase -in total wages is 30.8 per cent against an increase in numbers of -wage-earners of 28.4 per cent. The figures are better for the children; -their wages are stated to have increased 54.4 per cent. There are ample -reasons why this should be so. Popular agitation in behalf of the -little ones may be guessed to have had some effect in the betterment -of their pay; and a still greater effect has been wrought by their -vastly increasing productivity. The perfecting of the instruments of -production has been carried to such a degree that many a machine may be -operated by a nursling; and it is well-nigh inevitable that some part -of this increased productivity should be compensated for by increased -pay of the operatives. - -The number of women in factory work in the United States is 1,031,747, -nearly one-fifth of the total. There are 230,199 in New York, 143,109 -in Massachusetts, 126,093 in Pennsylvania, 58,978 in Illinois, 53,711 -in Ohio. Eighteen of the nineteen factory States show an increase, -Maine being the exception; and in thirteen of these States the -percentage of gain is considerably in excess of that of men workers. -Washington leads with a gain of 151.8 per cent; Michigan and Illinois -show gains of 79 per cent each; Vermont, of 63.1; Indiana, 56.4; -California, 46.8; Pennsylvania, 44.9; New Jersey, 39.3. In States -outside the factory list still greater increases are shown. The figures -for South Carolina are 158.3 percent; for North Carolina, 151.2; West -Virginia, 130.2; Alabama, 109.1; Georgia, 82.2. - -In specific industries the gains are sometimes enormous. There are -no women reported for coke-making, and the number employed in making -agricultural implements has declined 25.7 per cent. Car-building, too, -shows a decline. But in refining petroleum the 60 women wage-earners -represent a gain of 3200 per cent, and in bicycle and tricycle making -the 517 women represent a gain of 3346.7 per cent. An increase of -2600 per cent is shown for distilled liquors, although men workers -decreased 23.8 per cent. A decrease of men workers and an increase -of women workers are also shown for clay products, flouring and -grist-mill products, chewing and smoking tobacco and snuff, starch, -cheese, butter, and condensed milk, watches, and watch-cases. -The percentage of increase is in excess of that of men workers in -oleomargarine, pocket-books, trunks and valises, tanned, curried, and -finished leather, and needles and pins. There are six and one-half -times as many women as men in collar and cuff making, and more than -twice as many in the leather glove and mitten industry; in the latter, -moreover, the percentage of increase for women is double that for men. -There are 37,762 women making cigars and cigarettes, a gain of 56 per -cent, against a gain of but 4.6 per cent for men. Malt liquors show an -increase of 101.6 per cent of women workers against an increase of 30.2 -per cent of men workers. Women have also increased in number in the -cotton goods, flax, hemp, and jute, rubber boot and shoe, glass-making, -slaughtering, and meat-packing, and boot and shoe industries, and in -newspaper publishing. - - -VI - -There are 168,624 children employed in manufactures throughout the -country, a gain of 39.5 per cent. Child labor has increased in twelve -of the factory States, remained practically stationary in two (Michigan -and New Hampshire), and decreased in five States. The reasons for -a decrease, where it is observed, are not hard to find; in certain -industries child labor has been demonstrated to be unprofitable. -But wherever it has been found profitable it seems to have been -increasingly utilized. The increase in Wisconsin is 193.5 per cent; -in Washington, 103.8; in Illinois, 92; in New Jersey, 51.4; in -Pennsylvania, 47.8; and in Massachusetts, 44.9. In States outside of -the foregoing list the same tendency is shown. South Carolina increased -its child laborers by 270.7 per cent; Alabama, by 143.8; North -Carolina, 119.2; Georgia, 81. - -Children number 17.5 per cent of all the factory wage-earners of -South Carolina, and 14.6 per cent of all those of North Carolina. In -five other Southern States (including Maryland) the percentages range -from 4.3 to 7.6, while among Northern States Rhode Island children -form 5.2 per cent of the factory wage-earners, and Pennsylvania and -Wisconsin children 4.5 and 4 per cent, respectively. If Pennsylvania is -comparatively low in percentage, it is because of the great mass of its -adult workers; for in absolute numbers of child workers it heads the -list of commonwealths. No less than 33,135 children are employed in its -factories, a figure which puts to shame the puny showing of New York, -with 13,199, and of Massachusetts, with 12,556. - -In certain industries children form more than one-fourth of all -the operatives for a particular locality. In the making of cotton -goods in Alabama 29.2 per cent of the workers are children, and in -South Carolina 26.8 per cent. The figures for this industry in North -Carolina, Georgia, Virginia, and Maryland are nearly identical. In -Pennsylvania, for the making of jute goods the figures are 26.2, and -for silk and silk goods, 20.2. Slightly more than one-fourth of the -hosiery and knit-goods workers of Georgia are children and slightly -less than one-fourth of the tobacco workers (chewing, smoking, and -snuff) of North Carolina. Massachusetts, with its factory law, can make -but the humble showing of 6.4 per cent of children in its cotton-goods -factories, and Rhode Island but 10.3 per cent. Glass-making is an -industry which has made a most literal adaptation of Jesus’ invitation -to little children; though, if the words of reputable eye-witnesses -are to be accepted, it is not exactly a heaven into which they are -welcomed. Of the operatives in Pennsylvania glass works, children -number 14 per cent, and of those in New Jersey glass works, 15.7 per -cent. - -In the cotton-goods industry there are 39,866 children, a gain of 70.1 -per cent. It is interesting to learn that there are 1003 children -employed in ship-building, and that this number is a gain of 476.4 per -cent over 1890. There are 4521 in boot and shoe making, an increase of -85 per cent. There are 2259 in flax, hemp, and jute weaving, nearly -twice as many as ten years ago. There are 316 in turpentine and rosin -making, a gain of 236.2 per cent. The number has decreased for some -reason in the making of clay products, as has also the number of men -workers, women having now a growing preference in the potteries. There -are also fewer children in petroleum refining, but in button-making -an increase of 321.6 per cent, in leather-glove making of 185.7 per -cent, and in slaughtering and meat-packing of 138.1 per cent is shown. -Watch-making shows a gain of 30 per cent, bicycle-making of 780 per -cent. Children have been found comparatively unadaptable in the liquor -industry. Only 643 are employed in brewing and 18 in distilling. For -all that, these figures represent an increase--in the former case of -24.6 per cent, in the latter of 200 per cent. - -Children, according to the census, are persons below the age of -sixteen. Testimony outside of the census reports shows the extreme -youth of many of these operatives. Investigations among the glass works -of southern New Jersey reveal a number of cases of child workers of -eight, nine, and ten years of age. Mr. J. W. Sullivan, a careful and -accurate observer, who visited this district in July of the present -year, confirms these statements. Miss Jane Addams, of Hull House, -found a child of five working at night in a South Carolina mill. -Mrs. Irene Ashby-Macfadyen, who has carefully studied conditions in -the Southern mills, gives many instances of extremely young children -working incredibly long hours. Professor George Clinton Edwards, in -the New York _Evening Post_ for August 13th, gives other instances -relating to the mills of Dallas, Tex. In a later communication to the -same journal he quotes the statement of a mill superintendent to the -effect that of sixty boys and seventy-six girls employed, “there are -two in their tenth year, nine in their eleventh year, thirteen in their -twelfth year, and seventeen in their fourteenth year.” “This list, -from the pay-roll,” writes Professor Edwards, “does not include the -little children, who, with the mills’ knowledge, worked at the mills’ -work, who earned the mills’ pay in the 10 or 20 per cent increase -received by the relatives they assisted at piece work, and who were, -therefore, in fact, the mills’ employees.” Labor Commissioner Lacey, -of North Carolina, reports 7605 children under fourteen in 261 mills. -A correspondent of the Cincinnati _Post_ estimated 400 of the 1000 -children employed in five mills in Columbia, S.C., to be under twelve -years of age. Testimony by mill officials before a Southern legislature -acknowledged in one instance 30 per cent of child workers under twelve -years in a spinning room, and in another 25 per cent. - -The census reports bear amiable testimony to the providence of the -mill-owners. “Many of the mills,” says the South Carolina report, -“have reading rooms and libraries for their employees, and nearly -all contribute regularly to the support of the local schools.” “In -the absence of legislation regulating child labor,” says the Georgia -report, “all the cotton manufacturers in the State have signed an -agreement to exclude from the mills children under ten years of age, -and those under twelve who cannot show a certificate of four months’ -attendance at school.” In the North Carolina report we find, “In the -absence of legislation nearly all the mill-owners have agreed to -discontinue the employment of children under twelve years of age.” -A correspondent of the New York _World_ found a like benevolence -among the glass employers in southern New Jersey. “I need the boys,” -said one, “all I can do is to treat the boys as well as I can.” The -mill-owners, one and all, demand that the State keep its hands off, -and trust to their own benevolence for remedies. So far, in the South, -despite a three years’ agitation, the matter is still left entirely in -their control. - -Criticism of the mill-owners has been made to the effect that despite -their benevolent professions, the children are poorly paid and that -they remain uneducated. Some of them work long hours for 10 cents a -day, others for 12-1/2, 15, and 18 cents. A newspaper correspondent -tells of a certain spinning room in a Southern mill wherein the average -daily pay for all children is 23-8/10 cents. “I know of babies,” writes -Mrs. Macfadyen, “working for 5 and 6 cents a day.” The schooling which -a child working seventy-two hours a week can get may be roughly guessed -at. Mrs. Macfadyen found 567 children under twelve years working -in eight mills. Only 122 of these children could read or write. In -a school in a mill-town of between 6000 and 8000 persons, the same -investigator found an enrolment of 90 pupils divided into two classes. -A visit to one of these classes disclosed 22 children, only 12 of whom -were mill-workers’ children, and 10 had worked in the mills from one to -three years. - -Criticisms based on these data are, however, generally held to be -sentimental and irrelevant. Glass-blowing or textile-weaving, like -anthracite mining, is, in the sententious phrase of President George F. -Baer, of the Philadelphia and Reading Railway Company, “a business, and -not a religious, sentimental, or academic proposition.” It is conducted -for the making of money, and not for the spiritual or hygienic welfare -of the operatives. It would be well, say the employers, if things could -be better. But for the present they are making all the contribution -to that end that they feel can conveniently be made. Moreover, they -contend--and they are supported generally by the local ministers, who -have in charge the spiritual affairs of the populace; by the local -editors, lawyers, and solid men of “business”--it is better that -children should work in the mills and factories than “run about the -streets.” As for education, the contributing employers point to the -schools, as though to say, “Here are the opportunities; why do you not -take advantage of them?” It is quite enough to provide a balky horse -with water, without being morally obliged to make him drink. - -FOOTNOTE: - -[4] Since the publication of the _Independent_ article the author’s -attention has been called to an address entitled “The New Feudalism,” -delivered by Mr. Benjamin A. Richmond, of Cumberland, Md., before the -Maryland Bar Association in July, 1898. The author had never seen or -heard of this address. It is written from a legal standpoint, and both -the matter and the treatment are widely different from the matter and -manner of the _Independent_ article. But whatever the differences, the -same general idea is to be found in both papers, and it is only just -that acknowledgment should be made of Mr. Richmond’s priority. - - - - -CHAPTER V OUR MAKERS OF LAW - - -The dual responsibility which our lawmakers and judges bear, on the -one hand to the people, and on the other to the Big Men, produces -a chaos of conflicting laws and decisions. For the chartering of -business corporations we have the “Delaware theory,” which seems to be -to give the applicant whatever he asks for; the “New Jersey theory,” -which is a slight modification of the former; and the “Massachusetts -theory,” which reserves to the State a certain measure of supervision -and control. For the fixing of employers’ liability for injuries to -workmen we have a wide range of precedents, from States which hold to -the common-law doctrine that practically frees the employer from blame, -to those which fix a liability in somewhat definite terms. Factory -legislation, regulations for the public health, the determination of a -legal workday, the restraining of corporate aggressiveness--these and -a score of like questions are variously passed upon or deliberately -avoided in the several States. Judicial decisions, too, present a -spectacle of the widest diversity. - -Nevertheless this chaos shows signs of a gradual reduction to order. -The insistent challenge, “Under which king, Bezonian, speak or die!” -which perpetually assails all of our legislative and judicial -functionaries, sooner or later forces a decision, and naturally it is -the stronger rival that wins. How effective is this challenge, how -strong is the pressure, Mr. John Jay Chapman has strikingly shown in -his “Causes and Consequences,” and the instances that crop out from -time to time, like that of the recent tampering with the Supreme Court -of Missouri, reveal only a needless confirmation of a known truth. -Legislation in behalf of the general welfare and of the industrially -dependent classes becomes less frequent and more guarded; and judicial -decisions in matters that involve class antagonisms are more frequently -given to the dominant class. - - -I - -A marked tendency of recent legislation is that toward giving increased -powers to municipal officials. Another is that toward the creation -of boards charged with administrative, executive, semi-judicial, and -even police powers. The institution of these boards means simply a -further removal from the people of the conduct of public affairs. -Mr. Leonard A. Blue, in the _Annals of the American Academy_ for -November, 1901, gives an interesting view of the subject. “These -boards,” he writes, “are practically irresponsible bodies. They are -beyond the control of the people, or of any one who is responsible -to the people for their actions. Appointed as they are for definite -terms of office, they cannot be removed during that term except after -an investigation which amounts to an impeachment. The Governor who -appoints them in many cases can only appoint a single member, the -terms of the others extending beyond his own, so that he can neither -mould the policy of the board nor can he be held responsible for it.” -And he quotes from one of the messages of the Hon. W. E. Russell, -Governor of Massachusetts (1891-93), these words: “The people of the -State might have a most decided opinion about the management and work -of the departments, and give emphatic expression to that opinion, -and yet be unable to control their action. The system gives great -power without proper responsibility, and tends to remove the people’s -government from the people’s control.” Irresponsible to both the people -and the people’s officials as they are, these boards are yet not -wholly unsusceptible to outside pressure; they are, as is well known, -peculiarly liable to the influence of the Big Men. - - -II - -While legislation moves rapidly enough in the direction of detaching -political powers from the people, it shows a growing disinclination -to meddle with affairs between magnate and minion. Twelve or fifteen -years ago, in certain sections, “labor” legislation had a flourishing -career. The number of laws so classified, passed in a single three-year -period in New York State, made a record for all time. Labor was then -rapidly combining, and its lusty organizations made emphatic demands -for protective laws. A Democratic Governor, not wholly regardless of -hopes of the Presidential succession, for the time allied himself -with the movement and secured the passage of many of these measures. -With an alacrity much greater than that with which the Constitution -follows the flag, judicial decisions in those days tended to follow the -general policy of the party in power, and thus but slight trouble was -experienced in securing constitutional sanction. - -Other States followed, and for several years the astonishment and -indignation of the Big Men were intermittently roused by the spectacle -of Jacobinical legislators meddling in affairs outside their province. -Mr. F. J. Stimson, in the _Atlantic Monthly_ for November, 1897, -informs us that in the ten preceding years 1639 laws relating to -labor had been passed in the various States and Territories. This -is an average of 3.4 a year for each legislature, though the courts -had modified the average somewhat by declaring 114 of these measures -unconstitutional. Doubtless among those that escaped the “killing -decree” of the courts were a number that benefited the worker, though -it is doubtful if any of them served to modify his economic status. - -However that may be, it is unquestioned that the tendency toward the -enactment of this sort of legislation has suffered a decline. It is -hard to fix the point of culmination, though probably it lies somewhere -about the years 1896-97. In isolated instances, and under peculiar -circumstances, it is conceded there is an occasional revival. The -Pennsylvania legislature of 1897 showed a remarkable zeal, shortening -the workday of women and minors, limiting child labor, establishing -a bureau of mines, and making other regulations. Maryland, in 1898, -imposed certain mining regulations and required seats in stores for -women workers. Virginia and Massachusetts, in the same year, interfered -slightly, the former with an arbitration act. In the spring of 1899, -Kansas, Illinois, Colorado, Indiana, Michigan, Nebraska, Washington, -and Wisconsin, all addressed themselves more or less earnestly to the -redress of certain grievances; and they were followed by Iowa in 1900, -by Massachusetts again in the same year, and by Alabama in 1901. In -the present year New York, after five years of agitation, reluctantly -granted a moderately expressed employers’ liability law. - -Most of this legislation, however, was enacted in the newer States, -and served only to push them along toward the standard set in the -older States in earlier years. Advances of any sort are difficult to -discover. As for the year 1901, the record of progressive legislation -is almost bare. Congress suppressed the Eight-hour, Anti-injunction, -and Prison-labor bills, and mutilated the Chinese bill. A convention -of the National Association of Railway Commissioners, comprising -representatives from twenty-five State boards and from the Interstate -Commerce Commission, petitioned Congress, in June, 1901, to enact -a number of measures regarding railway traffic; but our lawmakers -appear to have been too busy with other matters. Factory legislation -has suffered a relapse in all of the States. “The statutes of 1901,” -euphemistically writes Mr. Horace G. Wadlin, in the New York State -Library’s “Review of Legislation, 1901,” “which may be classed as -protective legislation, intended to safeguard the workman in his -employment or to secure to him his wages, are neither very numerous -nor very radical.” Something better, however, as Mr. Adna F. Weber -points out in the same volume, was done in regard to shorter workdays. -California passed an Eight-hour law for State work; Minnesota, with -certain liberal exceptions, another; while Utah penalized infractions -of an existing law. Even Pennsylvania, generally so sensitive in -the matter of interfering with the rights of her workers to employ -themselves in any manner they are constrained to choose, made the -daring innovation of prohibiting a longer workday than twelve hours for -women and minors in bakeries. Doubtless the lesson to be learned from -this is a growing inclination toward the gospel of relaxation, which -Mr. Herbert Spencer so emphatically invoked on his visit here twenty -years ago. An industrial Feudalism is not inconsistent with a moderate -workday, and it is not unlikely that some further experiments in this -line may be made. - - -III - -An average man, not overlearned in political science, and not too well -acquainted with the ways and means of politicians, might naturally -suppose that the result of something more than 1639 “labor” laws would -be an almost revolutionary change in the conditions of industry. He -might suppose a general effect comprising these particulars: the -securing of safe places and safe conditions for toil; the utmost -safeguarding against accidents; the fixing of liability for injuries or -death suffered in the service of a master; the guarantee of the right -of workmen to combine, to leave their work for causes sufficient to -themselves, and peaceably to persuade others to do so; the guarantee of -protection from blacklisting by employers, and the framing of all such -laws in a spirit so sincere and in diction so definite that judicial -discretion would be reduced to a minimum. - -“Labor” legislation, however, takes on too much a form and pressure due -to influences from above to confirm even this temperate supposition. It -is somewhat presumptuous, and in a later time will be grossly impious, -for a layman not of the seigniorial class to speak querulously on -so sacred a subject; yet it needs must be said that the mass of the -measures so far framed have proceeded but little beyond the confines of -the common law. Many of them, indeed, are mere enactments into statute -of that elastic, not to say elusive, body of precedent. The common law -comes down to us from distant times, when other conditions prevailed, -and throughout all of it which bears on the relations of master and -servant there runs a principle based on an unsupported theory. “This -theory,” writes Mr. George W. Alger, a member of the New York Bar, in -the _American Journal of Sociology_ for November, 1900, “resolutely -closed its eyes to common, obvious, social and economic distinctions -between men, either considered as individuals or as classes, and with -a self-imposed blindness imagined rather than saw the servant and his -master acting upon a plane of absolute and ideal equality in all -matters touching their contractual relation; both were free and equal, -and the proper function of government was to let them alone. If the -servant was dissatisfied with the conditions of his employment; if the -dangers created not merely by the necessities of the work, but by the -master’s indifference to the safety of his men, were in the eyes of the -latter too great to be endured with prudence, then, being under this -theory a ‘free agent’ to go or to stay, if he chose to stay he must -take the possible consequences of personal injury or death.” - -Under the common law, it is true, the employer is presumed to have -certain duties toward his workmen. As interpreted by Mr. Stephen D. -Fessenden, LL.M., in the _Bulletin_ of the Department of Labor, for -November, 1900, these obligations are as follows:-- - -“An employer assumes the duty toward his employee of exercising -reasonable care and diligence to provide the employee with a reasonably -safe place at which to work; with reasonably safe machinery, tools, and -implements to work with; with reasonably safe materials to work upon, -and with suitable and competent fellow-servants to work with him; and, -in case of a dangerous or complicated business, to make such reasonable -rules for its conduct as may be proper to protect the servants employed -therein.” - -This common-law doctrine is, however, very seriously qualified by the -doctrine of the workman’s assumption of risk, of his contributory -negligence, and of negligence on the part of a fellow-servant. Each of -the terms in this doctrinal trinity is of expansive elasticity, and -even the constituent words of each term may be variously interpreted. -So that a workman forced to earn his bread where he can, in the face -of constant perils, literally takes his life in his hands. If injured, -there may be set up and sustained against his claim for damages -the plea of free and unconstrained assumption, or of contributory -negligence, or of negligence of another workman, even though the latter -may be a superior who orders the victim to his dangerous task. - -“It is a well-settled principle of common law,” writes Mr. Fessenden, -“that where ... duties [of employers] are imposed by legislative -enactment or municipal ordinance, it is negligence on the part of the -employer to fail to comply with [these] requirements.” Now it happens -that the United States, twenty States, the District of Columbia (by act -of Congress), and one Territory have enacted this common-law principle -into statute, affixing it to certain regulations of industry. Yet in -such manner are the greater number of these statutes drawn that it -is often found possible to evade them on the score of one or more of -the terms in the common-law theory. The record of decisions on these -statutes is at best conflicting and confusing. But enough can be shown -to illustrate the frequent futility of the laws to secure either -employers’ compliance with imposed duties or employers’ liability for -injuries due to negligence. The Ohio Supreme Court, in 1895, held that -“one cannot maintain an action against his employer for an injury -following a violation of the act regulating coal mines, unless at the -time he was injured he was in the exercise of due care; that one who -voluntarily assumes a risk thereby waives the provisions of a statute -made for his protection.” The Wisconsin Supreme Court decided that the -law (1889) requiring the guarding or blocking of railway frogs “does -not take away the defence of contributory negligence.” The New York -Court of Appeals in the case of Knisley _vs._ Pratt (148 N. Y. 372) -decided that to hold that the workman could not waive his master’s -statutory duty by continuing at work was “a new and startling doctrine -calculated to establish a measure of liability unknown to the common -law.” - -Statute law is presumed to replace common law and to redress the -inequities resulting from the application of old principles to changed -conditions. But the redress of inequities is conspicuously wanting in -much of the so-called “protective” legislation. It is impossible to -guess whether on the one hand in legislative indifference or unwisdom, -or on the other hand in judicial interestedness and overwisdom, lies -the greater cause of these statutory failures. Some added speculations -on the subject will be found further along. But whatever the attitude -of the judges, that of the lawmakers reveals a chronic and now -intensifying fear of disturbing the sacred privileges of “business.” - -The contractual waiving, by the employee, of the employer’s negligence, -is a subject about which a number of legislatures have concerned -themselves. Two States (Georgia and Massachusetts), according to -Mr. Fessenden, have forbidden such waivers generally, one State -(Ohio) has declared void such contracts when made by employees, -and twelve States and one Territory have forbidden such waivers -where the liability is imposed by statute. The Ohio law, however, -was declared unconstitutional by the United States Circuit Court -for the Northern District of Ohio in 1896 on the ground that “in -denying to the employees of a railroad corporation the right to make -their own contracts concerning their own labor, [it] is depriving -them of ‘liberty’ and of the right to exercise the privileges of -manhood, ‘without due process of law’;” and furthermore that it was -class legislation. Each of these laws, moreover, can be practically -nullified, as the courts have repeatedly held. An employer may organize -a relief organization for the payment of benefits. He may tax his -employees for a greater or less part of the expenses of the department. -He may then make employment conditional upon the workman’s joining -the association and signing a pledge agreeing, in consideration of -the payment of the regular benefits, to release the employer from -all claims for injuries. Such contracts are valid, since, according -to the ingenious interpretation of the courts, they do not waive -damages, but choose between two sources of compensation. Only one State -(Iowa) has had the temerity to declare this practice illegal, and in -view of the action of the courts the law will probably be held to be -unconstitutional. - -Statutory provisions against accidents to workmen reveal quite as much -timidity as do provisions regarding employers’ liability. The yearly -number of accidents in our industries is unknown, and can be only -roughly guessed at. The investigation of the New York Commissioner of -Labor, in the spring of 1899, would indicate a yearly average of 14,576 -accidents for factory workers alone in one State. In the Pennsylvania -anthracite mines more than 400 persons are killed every year, and in -the bituminous mines of the same State the yearly average for the -period 1895-98 was 171 killed and 421 injured. An official report made -to the United States Geological Survey in September gives the record -of lives lost in mining coal for the year 1901 as 1467, and the number -of workmen injured as 3643. In the anthracite mines of Pennsylvania -513 men were killed and 1243 injured, and in the bituminous fields of -the same State 301 were killed and 656 injured. The railroads provide -a yearly Gettysburg, with some 40,000 casualties to workmen alone; -and many an industry annually furnishes its humble Bull Run or Fort -Donelson. - -Regulations, however, proceed cautiously, not to say haltingly; they -are generally tame regulations, they are frequently disobeyed, and -their effect on the casualty rate is anything but radical. Though for -1901 the increased use of safety appliances lessened the percentage of -coupling accidents on railroads, the percentage actually increased for -1898, 1899, and 1900. Since 1898 there has been an increase in the rate -of accidents in coal mining, and doubtless, also, if the figures were -known, an increase could be shown for factories and workshops. - -Although twenty-one States, according to Mr. William F. Willoughby, in -the _Bulletin_ for January, 1901, provide for an inspection service -in factories, only thirteen impose specific provisions making it -obligatory upon factory and mill owners to take certain precautions -against accidents. Only one of these laws, moreover,--that of -Ohio,--may fairly be called an adequate and definitely expressed -statute. There are but five States that have enacted laws “the purpose -of which is to make it obligatory upon directors of building and -construction work to take certain precautions against accidents,” -and only one of these (New York) has given the measure an adequate -comprehensiveness. Twenty-three States have more or less elaborate -mining regulations; but as compliance with these laws is usually -left to the honor and benevolence of the mine owner, and as mining -accidents continue at a practically static rate, it is hard to see the -beneficial result. Some of the States compel railroads to block or -guard frogs, and several have laws independent of the Federal statute -of 1893, requiring the use of automatic couplers and power brakes. The -former may be evaded, however; and, in the absence of statute imposing -liability, the evasion counts for nothing in behalf of an injured -workman’s claim for damages. The effect on the accident rates has -already been mentioned. - -Dr. Sarah S. Whittelsey’s paper in the _Annals of the American Academy_ -for July, 1902, summarizes the report of the Industrial Commission on -the results of factory legislation in the various States. From this -it appears that only about half the States have passed what may be -called factory acts, many of which are mere fire-escape provisions, and -that there are almost no factory acts in the South, nor in the more -distinctly agricultural States of the West. New Hampshire, Vermont, -Nebraska, and California generously permit the employment in factories -of children ten years old; seven States put the limit at twelve years, -two at thirteen, ten at fourteen, and one makes the limit fourteen -years for girls and twelve years for boys. Working hours have been -more or less regulated for women and minors in fifteen States, and for -minors alone in nine States. Courts in three States, however, have -declared acts regulating working hours of women unconstitutional. In -sixteen States, three Territories, and the District of Columbia there -is absolutely no limitation for persons of any age or sex. Aside -from certain occasional acts relating to the payment of wages, to -inspection, and to employers’ liability, this is a complete summary of -protective legislation concerning the industries that employ 5,321,087 -of the Nation’s wage-earners. - -Mr. Fessenden gives a summary of the laws for the protection of workmen -in their employment, in the _Bulletin_ for January, 1900. The most -timid conservative may read it with relief, for any fears of an undue -lodgment of power in the working classes will be effectually banished -by its perusal. Only nine States have gone so far as to enact into -statute the supposed common-law principle that combinations of workmen, -formed for the purpose of seeking increase of wages and betterment of -conditions, are not of themselves unlawful. Four others specify that -the provisions of their “anti-trust” acts do not apply to combinations -of labor. On the other hand, the anti-conspiracy laws of eleven -States are capable of interpretation which would penalize many of the -peaceable methods of labor societies, and such interpretations have -been frequently made. - -Moreover, the wording of Sections 3995 and 5440 of the Federal Revised -Statutes, chapters 647 of the Anti-trust act, and 104 of the Interstate -Commerce act, and the amendment of 1889 to the latter, are capable -of interpretation to the effect that collective quitting of work on -railways is illegal. Decisions to that effect have several times -been made in the United States courts. “A strike, or a preconcerted -quitting of work,” reads the decision in United States _vs._ Cassidy -(1895) before the District Court of the United States for the Northern -District of California, “by a combination of railroad employees, -is in itself unlawful, if the concerted action is knowingly and -wilfully directed by the parties to it for the purpose of obstructing -and retarding the passage of the mails, or in restraint of trade -and commerce among the States.” “It will be practically impossible -hereafter,” reads the United States Circuit Court decision in the -case of Waterhouse _et al. vs._ Cromer (1893), “for a body of men to -combine to hinder and delay the work of the transportation company -without becoming amenable to the provisions of these statutes.” The -indefinite diction of many of the State laws against “intimidation and -coercion” also gives wide scope to judicial discretion, and permits the -occasional naming of the most innocuous acts as “coercion.” - -The necessity of peace in an industrial society is everywhere -recognized; and it is, therefore, not surprising that really earnest -efforts have been made in behalf of arbitration. It obtained, in a -measure, during the older Feudalism, through the “courts baron,” -which considered tenantry and wage-questions; and it is becoming more -common day by day. Within sixteen years twenty-one States and the -United States have passed more or less effective measures looking to -its use in labor disputes. Political coercion is also a matter that -has won a large share of legislative attention; twenty-nine States and -two Territories have enacted laws regarding it. There is, however, an -important distinction to be made. In an ordinary conflict of political -issues, when the magnates and their retainers are to be found in both -parties, it is obvious confusion and the unsettling of political -conditions for the employers to dictate how their workmen shall vote. -But when political issues suggest a class conflict, as in 1896, some of -the provisions of these laws are by common consent waived. The humble -toiler may vote as he likes on the immaterial questions of ordinary -campaigns; but on questions having to do with the salvation of society -and the preservation of the hallowed code of “business,” instruction -and even gentle pressure become the solemn duty of his social betters. -There are fewer laws, it may be observed, regarding another kind of -coercion. Discharges on account of membership in a labor union are -forbidden in but fifteen states; and in two of these (Illinois and -Missouri) such provisions have been found, after much painstaking -study, to be unconstitutional. The discovery is considered a most happy -one; and according to the injunction of the Federal Constitution, that -“full faith and credit shall be given in each State to the public -acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other State,” the -ruling will no doubt be found applicable in a number of the other -commonwealths. - - -IV - -Our lawmakers are not to be blamed for decisions of -unconstitutionality. Rather, they are to be congratulated. For the -recent tendency of the judges to determine for themselves what shall -be enacted into law has developed new refuges for the lawmakers. We -have now Solon, the legislator, and Rhadamanthus, the judge, in new -rôles--the rôles of the good and bad partner of Dickens’s novel. To -the humble voter, when the pressure from below conflicts with the -pressure from above, Solon is now able to stand as the supporter of -popular measures, and to throw upon the less responsible Rhadamanthus -the onus of declaring them bad law. The fury of the magnate at Solon’s -demagogy is mitigated, if not extinguished, when he considers the -difficulties of the lawmaker’s position, and especially by the further -consideration that Rhadamanthus has the final word to say. Solon has -other refuges, it is true; and sometimes these must be availed of, -for it is not always certain that a projected popular measure can be -declared unconstitutional. For several years it had been considered -possible, for instance, that an employers’ liability act, if passed in -New York, would stand the test of the courts. It became the custom, -therefore, when an adequate measure on this subject was introduced, for -the adverse interests to introduce a conflicting bill. The ingenious -lawmaker thereupon regretfully found a divided public sentiment, and -as a consequence no bill was passed. There are no reasons at hand -for accounting for the fact that at the last session of the Albany -legislature such a measure was actually enacted. - - -V - -How far our legislators are enabled to withstand public sentiment, no -matter how strongly based in reason and how definite in objective, may -be instanced in the attitude of Congress regarding the Safety-appliance -act of 1893. Agitation for this measure had grown to such an extent -that action could no longer be delayed. But though action on the bill -could not be delayed, the terms of fulfilment of the bill could be -postponed to a comparatively remote period. The number of railway -employees killed in the year ended June 30, 1893, was 2727, a number -exceeding the Union death roll in every battle of the Civil War except -Gettysburg, and within 243 of that record. In the same year the number -of wounded (31,729) was more than three times as great as the number -of Union wounded at either Antietam or Chancellorsville, and more than -double that at Gettysburg. Yet despite this tremendous carnage, the -legislators, wavering between the public demands and the demands of the -magnates, though they passed the bill, generously granted five years -for its complete observance, and then gave the Interstate Commerce -Commission the power to grant further delays--in effect giving seven -years for its fulfilment. In those seven years 13,906 employees -were killed--a loss exceeding the Union death roll at Gettysburg, -Spottsylvania, the Wilderness, Antietam, Chancellorsville and -Chickamauga combined--and approximately 220,000 were wounded, or more -than three times the number of Union wounded in those six battles. That -a great part of this casualty record was avoidable is evidenced in the -August report of the Interstate Commerce Commission, which shows that -the number of employees killed in coupling accidents in the year ended -June 30, 1901, declined from 282 to 198, and the number injured from -5229 to 2768. It was in 1893 that this generous latitude was granted -the magnates. Were the occasion to arise now, it is probable that the -term of grace would number fourteen years instead of seven. - - - - -CHAPTER VI OUR INTERPRETERS OF LAW - - -The attitude of the judiciary in matters involving class antagonisms is -a subject upon which only the most restrained language is tolerable. -Even general inferences which suggest such a thing as judicial bias -must be avoided. Faith in the rectitude and wisdom of our judges is -a virtue sedulously preached,--perhaps most insistently by those who -do most toward their corruption,--and though the virtue as we know -it is rather vocal than immanent, it is sufficiently deep-seated to -be intolerant of spoken heresy. Were it openly questioned by any -considerable body of citizens, the foolhardy persons would soon bring -down upon themselves the rallying onslaught of those heterogeneous -elements which Karl Marx somewhat extravagantly pictured, “landlords -and capitalists, stock-exchange wolves and shopkeepers, protectionists -and free-traders, government and opposition, priests and freethinkers, -young street-walkers and old nuns--under the common cry for the -salvation of property, religion, the family, and society.” Such -heretics might have all the certainty of Paul, “that the law is good, -if a man use it lawfully,” and yet it would be a parlous thing to be -openly sceptical of the assumption that it is always lawfully used. - -But at least one may, without attainder of anarchy, assemble and -classify certain instances, and point out their coincidences and their -contrarieties. There is, for example, a notable sameness in kind of the -laws which are declared unconstitutional. There is, to utter it mildly, -a vast preponderance in the number of injunctions against striking, -boycotting, and agitating over the number against locking-out, -blacklisting, and the employment of armed mercenaries. There is a -practical, though not an entire, unanimity against the awarding of -damages to injured employees, whether the decision be based on common -or statute law; and, finally, there is a considerable diversity between -the decisions usually rendered by judges elected for short terms, and -therefore directly responsible to the people, and those rendered by the -less responsible judges, elected for long terms or appointed. - - -I - -The legislative aspects of employers’ liability have already been -considered. Certain judicial aspects of the matter need also to be -touched upon. The question is one of grave social import. The worker -no longer owns his tools, but must use the machinery provided for -him. A certain element of danger inheres in the operation of probably -all machinery; but when old, defective, or with its dangerous parts -unguarded, injuries to its operatives are well-nigh certain. Yet for -such injuries, with their awful consequences to the operative and his -dependent ones, there is generally no redress, except in a few States -where statutes have fixed the matter of liability in set terms which -leave no room for judicial discretion. - -Under the common law the workman is held to assume the risk attending -his employment. He is a free agent--so the legal fiction runs--and -if afraid of injury need not work. Common law also presupposes the -providing of a “reasonably safe” place and “reasonably safe” machinery -by the employer. It would be difficult to determine, however, from the -mass of decisions under the common law, what is meant by “reasonably -safe.” A Colorado lower court gave damages to the mother of a miner -killed by falling rock while removing débris from one of the mines of -the Moon-Anchor Consolidated Gold Mines, Limited. The case came finally -to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth District, -and the judgment was reversed, Judges Sanborn and Adams concurring and -Judge Thayer dissenting. The work was admittedly hazardous; in the -opinion of Judge Thayer “the place was needlessly made unsafe by the -master’s negligence.” The concurring judges, however, decided that the -company’s negligence was not responsible, and that “the deceased of his -own free will determined to cope with these risks and hazards.... In -this, his own voluntary conduct, is found the intervening, proximate, -and responsible cause of his injury.” (111 Federal Reporter, 298.) - -Even when the employer assures the workman of the safety of a machine, -the risk is still, according to many decisions, the workman’s. The -Circuit Court of Shiawassee County, Michigan, refused to award damages -to a workman for injuries sustained from a defective machine which he -was operating for his employer. The case went to the Supreme Court on -a writ of error, and on December 15, 1900, that court affirmed the -previous judgment. It had been shown that the plaintiff warned his -employer of the danger of the machine, and that the employer gave -assurances to the contrary. Nevertheless, in the words of Judge Moon -(Moore?), “one cannot continue to operate a machine which he knows is -dangerous simply upon the assurance of his employer that it is not, if -he has just as much knowledge of the danger arising from the operation -of the machine as the principal has [without assuming the risk].” (82 -N. W. Reporter, 1797.) - -The decision, read by Judge McLennan, in the recent case of Rice _vs._ -the Eureka Paper Company (76 App. Div. 336) before the Fourth Appellate -Division of New York State, would seem to indicate that the burden -of risk is not to be shifted from the workman even when his employer -acknowledges a defect in machinery and promises to remedy it. There is -some doubt, however, if such a decision, though valid in many States, -will stand in the State where it was given; for the Court of Appeals -has several times decided that liability follows from an acknowledgment -of defective machinery. On the other hand, this highest court of -New York State has won the distinction of carrying the doctrine of -assumption of risk to an extreme degree. The case of Gabrielson -_vs._ Waydell (135 N. Y. 1) involved the question of the liability of -the owners of a maritime vessel for injuries suffered by a sailor in -their employ. The captain of the vessel had committed a confessedly -unprovoked and particularly brutal assault upon the sailor, who had -subsequently sued the owner for damages. The court decided that the -sailor had no redress; that “the misconduct of the captain was a risk -assumed by the seaman, for the consequences of which the owners are not -responsible.” - -A fact more curious yet to the unlegal mind is the judicial contention, -instanced in the previous chapter, that statutory provisions for the -safeguarding of machinery may be waived by the workman. Evidently -his burden of risk, like the Hindu’s caste, is born with him, and -cannot be laid aside or escaped. The case of the E. S. Higgins Carpet -Company _vs._ O’Keefe (79 Federal Reporter, 900) is an illustration. -Damages for an injury received from an unguarded machine had been -given a fifteen-year-old boy in the United States Circuit Court for -the Southern District of New York. The United States Circuit Court of -Appeals for the Second Circuit, however, reversed the judgment. The -plaintiff was a minor, but this fact was held to have no bearing. “We -think the circumstance that he was a minor of no importance,” read -the decision of Judge Wallace. “The rules which govern actions for -negligence in the case of children of tender years do not apply to -minors who have attained years of discretion.” The New York factory act -required guards for this particular kind of machine. But that, also, -was immaterial. “The provisions of the statute ... requiring cogs to -be properly guarded, have no application to the case, except as regards -the question of the negligence of the defendant. As construed by the -highest courts of the State, the statute does not impose any liability -upon an employer for injuries received by a minor in his service in -consequence of the fault of the employee, or arising from the obvious -risks of the service he has undertaken to perform.” To clinch the -matter, Judge Wallace cited the then recent case of Graves _vs._ Brewer -before the Fourth Appellate Division of New York State, wherein the -court held that “the liability of the employer was not changed by -reason of the factory act requiring cog-wheels to be covered, because -such protection could be waived and was waived by a person accepting -employment upon the machine with the cogs in an unguarded condition, -as the danger was apparent, and one of the obvious risks of the -employment.” The case of Knisley _vs._ Pratt (148 N. Y. 372) before the -New York Court of Appeals was decided in the same way, and also the -case of White _vs._ Witteman Lithographic Company. In the latter case -the plaintiff was a child of fourteen. - -Such decisions are common in more States than one. Another case which -may prove of some interest to the lay mind is that of Gillen _vs._ the -Patten and Sherman Railroad Company (44 Atlantic Reporter, 361). The -plaintiff, while uncoupling cars, had his foot crushed in an unfilled -frog, and had been awarded damages. A motion for a new trial was -argued before the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, and was granted. -The decision, delivered by Judge Lucilius A. Emery, acknowledged the -existence of a statute (chapter 216 of 1889) requiring the filling -or blocking of guard rails or frogs on all railways before January -1, 1890. It held, however, that such filling and blocking was not -immediately mandatory upon a railroad constructed after that date. -“Such company is entitled to a reasonable time for compliance with that -statute.” It was at a crossing of such a railway that the trainman lost -his foot. He had no right to assume that the rails were blocked, merely -because a statute said they should be. The brakeman, therefore, assumed -the risk, and he also furnished contributory negligence, since “to move -about over frogs and switches while coupling and uncoupling cars, even -in moving trains, without taking any thought of the frogs and guard -rails, or as to where he may be stepping, is negligence on his part -contributing to the catching his foot in them.” - -When the doctrine of assumption of risk is inapplicable, when personal -negligence cannot be shown, and when there has been no waiving of -statutory provisions by the workman, there is yet, in judicial eyes, -one last resort for the defendant company--the common-law plea of -negligence on the part of a fellow-workman. There is some diversity of -opinion among eminent judges as to who are strictly fellow-servants. -“The courts of the majority of the States hold, however,” writes Mr. -Stephen D. Fessenden, in the _Bulletin_ of the Department of Labor for -November, 1900, “that the mere difference in grades of employment, or -in authority, with respect to each other, does not remove them from -the class of fellow-servants as regards the liability of the employer -for injuries to the one caused by the negligence of the other.” Thus -it has happened that a workman acting in the capacity of agent for his -employer, and ordering other workmen to do tasks at which injuries have -resulted, has been held to be a fellow-servant--a judgment relieving -his employer of liability. To the lay mind it would seem that workmen -in different departments could hardly be classed as fellow-servants; -and the United States Supreme Court has rendered a decision which makes -possible, under certain circumstances, such a discrimination. Since -then, however, the Federal courts have suffered a reaction on the -question, and current decisions tend the other way. - -A case before a State tribunal--the Supreme Court of Georgia (35 -Southeastern Reporter, 365)--illustrates the possibilities which lie -in this doctrine. A lineman, while repairing a wire for the Brush -Electric Light and Power Company, at Savannah, Ga., was killed through -the act of the engineer in turning on the current. The city court of -Savannah gave damages to his widow. The case was taken to the State -Supreme Court, and decision rendered March 3, 1900. The counsel for -the plaintiff contended that the fellow-servant doctrine could not -apply, on account of the lineman and engineer working in different -departments, “so that there was no opportunity for the exertion of a -mutual influence upon each other’s carefulness.” The court, however, -reversed the verdict. - -The disparity of opinion between inferior judges and superior judges -in cases of this kind is remarkable. The monthly _Bulletins_ of the -Department of Labor give a fairly excellent summary of court decisions -on labor questions. He who reads them will find the expression, -“judgment of the lower court reversed,” recurring with a rather painful -iteration; unless, indeed, the decision of the lower court has rebuked -the plaintiff, when the expression, “judgment of the lower court -affirmed,” is usually found. Mr. George W. Alger, in an article on “The -Courts and Factory Legislation,” in the _American Journal of Sociology_ -for November, 1900, gives the following careful and temperately worded -summary of recent reversals in employers’ liability cases in New York -State:-- - -“The percentage of reversals on appeal in master-and-servant cases of -this kind, when the verdict of the juries in the courts below had been -in plaintiff’s favor, is perhaps larger than in any other branch of -litigation. In New York, for example, an examination of twenty volumes -of the Court of Appeals reports (126 N. Y.-156 N. Y.) shows written -opinions in thirty-seven such cases. Of these: (1) in three cases -the juries in the lower court had found for defendant, and plaintiff -was the appellant; (2) in four cases the court below had dismissed -plaintiff’s case as insufficient, without requiring defendant to -introduce any testimony; (3) in thirty cases the juries below had found -for plaintiff with substantial damages. The Court of Appeals in class -(1) affirmed all of the cases where plaintiff was defeated below. In -class (2) it reversed the four cases where plaintiff had been summarily -non-suited and sent the cases back to trial courts to hear defendant’s -testimony: a partial victory at most for plaintiff. In class (3), -where plaintiff had actually received a verdict, of the thirty cases -twenty-eight were reversed. These statistics are interesting as showing -how complete is the lack of harmony between the courts, at least -in New York, and the moral sense of the people by whom the courts -were created, in regard to these cases. Twice in thirty times do the -opinions of the learned judges of New York’s highest court coincide -with the opinions of juries of citizens as to the requirements of -justice.” - -The tendency, which is most clearly indicated by the mass of decisions -in cases demanding damages for injuries or death, is the growing -disposition to make property paramount and life subordinate. It is a -common practice to set aside verdicts of damages on the score that they -are excessive. It is no less a common practice to instruct the jury to -decide for the defendant in order to rebuke litigation. The language of -the leading work on one phase of this subject--Shearman and Redfield’s -“A Treatise on the Law of Negligence”--sums up the matter in a few -words:-- - -“It has become quite common for judges to state as the ground of -decisions the necessity of restricting litigation. Reduced to plain -English, this means the necessity of compelling the great majority of -men and women to submit to injustice in order to relieve judges from -the labor of awarding justice.... The stubborn resistance of business -corporations, common carriers, and mill-owners, to the enforcement -of the most moderate laws for the protection of human beings from -injury, and their utter failure to provide such protection of their -own accord, ought to satisfy any impartial judge that true justice -demands a constant expansion of the law in the direction of increased -responsibility for negligence.” - - -II - -“Law,” wrote Sir Edward Coke, “is the perfection of reason.” This may -be true; but, if so, it tends to throw mankind over to the position of -the Catholics, that the reason itself needs considerable perfecting. -This is not only the disposition of the lay mind, but, evidently, also -of the supreme judicial mind; for a large part of the higher judicial -activity during recent years has been expended in declaring null and -void laws passed by two houses of the people’s representatives and -signed by an elected Governor or President. Mr. Stimson, in his summary -of labor legislation for the years 1887-97, found that only 114 out -of the 1639 laws passed had been declared unconstitutional. But these -114 comprised examples from 19 out of the 35 classes of legislation -passed, and must therefore have reacted upon a very considerable number -of the remainder. It is a coincidence which has been noted before, -and need not be specially insisted upon here, that the overwhelming -majority of laws which fail to reach the constitutional standards set -by our judges are those intended to safeguard the interests of the -industrially subordinate and to set some limitation to the powers of -the industrially mighty. - -The judicial mind, however, affects to know no difference between high -and low, between weak and strong; and thus its decisions, ignoring -actual conditions, tend more and more to strengthen the powers of -one class and to weaken the powers of another. “Liberty” is the -shibboleth; the citizen must be free to act as he wills. Somewhat -curiously, though, liberty of speech, press, and assemblage is not -so strenuously insisted upon; and, indeed, by injunctions and other -judicial determinations is at times rather severely limited: the miners -of West Virginia have been recently enjoined from holding meetings on -their own grounds. But economic liberty--the liberty of the dependent -classes to do acts which, in the nature of things, they cannot possibly -do--is held for a sacred principle. The doctrine of the extension of -the State’s police power, limiting the foregoing doctrine, has gained -some headway since the Utah decision confirmed a State’s right to limit -the hours of work for men in dangerous trades; but the determination of -how far it is to be applied rests largely with the forty-eight State -and Territorial courts; and it is a safe guess that it will meet with -stiff resistance if incarnated in further “advanced” legislation. - -“No discrimination,” which in effect means much discrimination, follows -the judicial shibboleth of “liberty.” Especially zealous for the -protection of liberty and keenly watchful of proposed discrimination -is that eminent tribunal, the Supreme Court of Illinois. Some six -years ago it discovered that the statute regulating the hours of -women workers in the factories contravened the Federal and State -constitutional guarantees of “life, liberty, and property.” A woman’s -labor was her property, and any limitation of it was a deprivation -“without due process of law.” On December 20, 1900, it fell to the lot -of this tribunal to pass upon two labor laws,--to the lay mind entirely -different in principle,--and, by a somewhat difficult struggling along -parallel lines of argument, triumphantly to reach conclusions adverse -to both of them. One was the Chicago ordinance requiring union labor -and an eight-hour day on all public work contracted for; the other -the State statute prohibiting discharge of an employee for belonging -to a labor union. Regarding the ordinance, the union requirement, in -the words of Associate Justice Magruder, “amounts to a discrimination -between different classes of citizens.” It is therefore void, and the -eight-hour provision is also void, because it “infringes upon the -freedom of contract, to which every citizen is entitled under the -law.... Any statute providing that the employer and laborer may not -agree with each other as to what time shall constitute a day’s work is -an invalid act.” (58 Northeastern Reporter, 985.) - -Without venturing to discuss this ruling, one may at least compare it -with the ruling on the State statute. The latter was a law intended to -prevent discrimination against union men. But, curiously to the unlegal -mind, it is discovered to be discrimination in _favor_ of the union -man. “The act certainly does grant to that class of laborers who belong -to union labor organizations a special privilege.” (58 Northeastern -Reporter, 1007.) The act was also found to “contravene those -provisions of the State and Federal constitutions which guarantee that -no person shall be deprived of ‘life, liberty, or property without due -process of law.’” “That strain again,” as Orsino, in “Twelfth Night,” -exclaims. It has not, however, a “dying fall,” for it has been taken up -and echoed in other quarters since. - -The liberty of the employer to pay his employees in brass checks or -store orders was affirmed by the Kansas Supreme Court on December -9, 1896, and the act requiring payment in lawful money was declared -invalid. “To say that a free citizen can contract for or agree to -receive in return for his labor one kind of property only, and that -which represents the smallest part of the aggregate wealth of the -country, is a clear restriction of the right to bargain and trade, a -suppression of individual effort, a denial of inalienable rights.” -Anti-truck acts were also declared unconstitutional by the courts of -Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, and West Virginia. The Kentucky Supreme -Court, however, nine months after the Kansas decision, found that -liberty and the compulsory payment of wages in lawful money were -compatible, so that the question is at least open. Decisions like that -of the Kansas court, and the somewhat similar decisions rendered in -Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Tennessee, of course fasten the laborer to -the company store; but of this the courts usually take no cognizance. -Actual liberty may be restrained, but theoretical liberty must not be -tampered with. - -Weekly payment laws are found to conflict with liberty in Pennsylvania, -Illinois, Missouri, West Virginia, and Indiana. Moreover, the liberty -of a legislature to determine that prevailing wages shall be paid to -employees of city and State must not be confused by the lay mind with -the liberty of the wage-earner to work under what conditions he must. -For the former is clearly unconstitutional, as decided in New York by -the Court of Appeals in February, 1901. “The effect of this statute -[the Prevailing Rate of Wages act],” reads the decision of Judge Denis -O’Brien, “was to make the city [of New York] a trustee or instrument -for the enforcement of the law in the interests of the persons for -whose benefit it was enacted, and thus the powers and functions of the -municipality are employed for purposes foreign to those for which they -were created and exist under the Constitution.” The eight-hour laws -passed in several of the States have generally suffered the Illinois -fate, although Kansas proved an exception. Regulation of the working -hours of women was nullified not only in Illinois, but in Nebraska -and California. The police-power doctrine, as voiced in the Utah -decision, may justify a limitation of the working day in dangerous -trades, but otherwise such a limitation appears to be an infringement -of the right of contract, or a deprivation of “property” without “due -process of law.” Even the National Eight-hour law of 1868, while not -strictly unconstitutional, is held to be merely advisory. “We regard -the statute,” says the Supreme Court (94 U. S. 404), “chiefly as in the -nature of a direction from the principal to his agent that eight hours -is deemed to be a proper length of time for a day’s labor, and that his -contract shall be based upon that theory.” - -Anti-trust laws may be quite as lacking in constitutional decorum as -are eight-hour and prevailing-wages laws; and the judiciary reserves -to itself the right to determine what are the standards. The Texas -Anti-trust law of 1889, for instance, overleapt judicial sanction. “It -is not every restriction of competition or trade,” reads the decision -of District Judge Charles Swayne (February 22, 1897), “that is illegal -or against public policy, or that will justify police regulation, but -only such as are unwarrantable or oppressive; and a State statute which -prohibits combinations formed for the purpose of reasonably restricting -competition violates the rights of contracts guaranteed by the Federal -Constitution.” (79 Federal Reporter, 627.) Another legislature, with -this lesson before it, will know better where to set bounds to its -attempt at interference. - -One cannot pass this phase of the general subject without recurring to -the pertinent advice of the wise Sir Francis Bacon. “Judges,” he wrote -in his essay, “Of Judicature,” “ought to remember that their office is -_jus dicere_, and not _jus dare_, to interpret law, and not to make -law.... Judges ought to be more learned than witty, more reverend than -plausible, and more advised than confident.... A judge ought to prepare -his way to a just sentence, as God useth to prepare his way, by raising -valleys and taking down hills; so when there appeareth on either side -a high hand, ... cunning advantages taken, combination, power, great -counsel, then is the virtue of a judge seen to make inequality equal; -that he may paint his judgment as upon an even ground.” Wise counsel! -though it seems to have lacked something in observance two hundred and -seventy-five years ago, and may be suspected, even yet, of not always -and everywhere reaching entire fulfilment. - - -III - -We have the testimony of no less eminent an authority than United -States District Judge John J. Jackson, of the Northern District of -West Virginia, that in all his experience on the bench he could not -recall a single occasion when any court, either Federal or State, ever -abused the writ of injunction in strike questions. It is a definite and -authoritative pronouncement; and the restrained and careful language -accompanying it, wherein the officials of labor unions are described -as “a professional set of agitators,” and “vampires that fatten on the -honest labor of the coal miners,” certainly proves that it cannot be -an _ex parte_ statement. Yet, for all that, there is a widely diffused -sentiment that the writ of injunction has occasionally been abused in -strike questions. In the same locality, at about the same time, an -injunction issued by United States District Judge B. F. Keller, of the -Southern District of West Virginia, declared, among a multitude of -other prohibitions, that the strikers “are further inhibited, enjoined, -and restrained from assembling in camp or otherwise,” even on grounds -leased by them for their meetings. - -A pamphlet, prepared by five members of the New York Bar and issued -by the Social Reform Club, of New York City, in the summer of 1900, -gives the substance of a number of injunctions that have been issued -against striking workmen. “In the case of the Sun Printing and -Publishing Company _vs._ Delaney and others in December (1899),” says -the pamphlet:-- - -“The Supreme Court of New York, among other things, enjoined the -defendants from the exercise of their right to give the public -their side of the controversy with the _Sun_ as an argument against -advertising in a paper which they claimed had treated them unjustly; it -also forbade them from attempting to persuade newsdealers from selling -the paper; and finally wound up with a sweeping restraint ‘from in -any other manner or by any other means interfering with the property, -property rights, or business of the plaintiff.’ It should be added -that, on appeal, the Appellate Division struck out these commands; -but they were so plainly subversive of fundamental rights that it is -difficult to see how they could have been granted in the first instance. - -“In still another case last year--The Wheeling Railway Company _vs._ -John Smith and others (so runs the title of the action without naming -the others)--in the United States Circuit Court, West Virginia, two -men not parties to the action, nor found to be agents of ‘John Smith -and others,’ whoever they may have been, were punished for contempt of -court, for, among other things, ‘reviling’ and ‘cursing’ the court? -not at all, but for ‘reviling’ and ‘cursing’ employees of the railroad -company. If these men had not actually served out an imprisonment in -jail for thirty days as a punishment for contempt of corporation, -it might be thought that your committee had taken this example from -opera bouffe. The legality of this punishment was never passed on by -the Supreme Court, for the reason, as your committee understand, that -the parties were unable to bear the expense of taking it there, and so -served their term in jail. - -“During the final drafting of our report a temporary injunction has -been granted by a Justice of the Supreme Court in New York City.... -This injunction forbids the defendants [certain members of the Cigar -Makers’ International Union] even from approaching their former -employers for the laudable purpose of reaching an amicable result; it -forbids them from making their case known to the public if the tendency -of that is to vex the plaintiffs or make them uneasy; it forbids them -from trying in a perfectly peaceable way in any place in the city, even -in the privacy of a man’s own home, to persuade a new employee that -justice is on their side, and that he ought to sympathize with them -sufficiently not to work for unjust employers; and, finally, it forbids -the union from paying money to the strikers to support their families -during the strike.” - -Such instances, as the pamphlet states, can be multiplied. Perhaps they -do not wholly controvert Judge Jackson’s declaration. But, at least, -they illustrate an unbridgeable disparity between the definitions of -justice held on the one hand by our interpreters of law, and on the -other by the overwhelming majority of the citizenship. That disparity -has been great in all recent times; but weekly and daily it grows -greater. The stronger inclination of the judiciary to make property the -paramount interest is everywhere observed; and the magnates, with an -exultant recognition of the fact, make haste to enjoy the fruits of the -new dispensation. - - -IV - -From judgeship to attorneyship of a great corporation has recently -become a common promotion. The number of ex-judges who have been thus -translated to higher sees is notable: one finds or hears of them in -many places. Republics may be ungrateful, as the adage runs, but -not so the magnates. The gratitude of the latter may not be wholly -platonic; it includes, no doubt, a lively sense of favors to come. But -whether prospective or retrospective, it expresses itself in deeds -of recompense, and that is the main test. It is a discriminating -gratitude, moreover. Keenly enough, it recognizes the comparative -value of service. Other servitors of the magnates may toil faithfully, -and receive but moderate reward. The moulders of opinion, such, for -instance, as the newspaper men, may ask for preferment, and be met by -the impatient retort of Richard III to Buckingham, “I am not in the -giving vein to-day.” But for one who can interpret the law as it should -be interpreted, there are glory and riches to be had for the asking. - - - - -CHAPTER VII OUR MOULDERS OF OPINION - - -“There never was a time,” says Justice Brewer, in the concluding -lecture of a series recently delivered by him at Yale University, -“when public opinion was more potent.” Possibly the saying is true; -but whatever force it may have lies in the application. Public opinion -may make for a general passivity--an acquiescence in things as they -are--quite as much as for a general strenuousness. Nowhere, for -instance, among civilized peoples, is public opinion more powerful -than in a quiet and isolated community, held fast to certain habitual -modes of speech and action. Only a brave man, or a desperate woman, so -environed, would dare defy the tribal customs. - -Public opinion in these United States may be more potent than ever -before, but the personal attitude which it supports and encourages -becomes more and more one of acquiescence in the existing régime. -A legislative reaction and a judicial reaction are manifested; and -a growing irritation is expressed, as from time to time those rude -disturbers of the public peace, the social reformers, come forward with -plans for curing imputed evils. Social and political quietism becomes -our everyday philosophy. An “air of contentment and enthusiastic -cheerfulness ... characterizes our society,” writes Professor William -G. Sumner, of Yale, in a recent number of the _Independent_; and though -the judgment might be somewhat more accurately worded, he is not far -wrong. A keen-eyed observer from Italy,--Professor Angelo Mosso, -of Turin,--who visited us a few years ago, gives somewhat similar -testimony. The fact astonishes him, as he confesses, since he saw -much of political and industrial evil which he could not comprehend a -democracy enduring; yet for all that the evidence was convincing. - - -I - -Among the causes making for this acquiescence in existing social -conditions, there are three which may be considered here. The first is -the one which so strongly impressed Professor Mosso. It is the rage -for individual exploitation. The imaginations of most men are fired -by the spectacle of the few achieving great fortunes; each believes -that a like fortune lies somewhere within his own reach, and with -blind fatuity he tolerates conditions which he instinctively feels to -be inequitable, simply because he expects himself to master them. “I -believe,” writes Professor Mosso, “that the desire to become wealthy is -so strong and powerful in every American that, in order to reserve the -opportunity of realizing such desire, Americans willingly submit to the -continuance of laws which allow such accumulations.” It is the petty -gambler’s faith, the conviction that, though everything be against him, -he will somehow “beat the game.” And just as the petty gambler’s faith -is fostered by the runners and “cappers” for faro, policy, roulette, -and keno, so the faith of the industrial underling is fostered by a -tremendous trumpeting of the ways and means to worldly “success.” The -preaching of “success” has become, in these last five years, a distinct -profession, honored and well recompensed. - -A second cause of the prevailing acquiescence in the present régime -applies more particularly to social reformers, and to those who, -while not actively enlisted as “come-outers,” do yet sympathize with -the activities of their more aggressive brethren. It is a feeling, -born of years of experience in promoting some collective good, of -the hopelessness of achievement. Opposed at all points, frustrated -at many, there comes a time, sooner or later, when all but the most -resolute reformers are forced to admit that little or nothing can be -done. Many thereupon fall back into the ranks of the do-nothings and -the care-nothings; while others, in whom the fire of purpose is not -entirely quenched, reluctantly exchange their radical and comprehensive -plans of social changes for more narrow and immediate purposes,--the -giving of small charities, the doing of near-at-hand services, and the -occasional support of a particular public measure. - - -II - -A third, and perhaps the most important, cause is the continual output -from pulpit, sanctum, forum, and college chair, of our professional -moulders of opinion. Now not all of this output, it is freely -conceded, makes for acquiescence; but the overwhelming mass of it -unquestionably does. From these instructors of the people we learn -that conditions, while not perfect, either are reasonably near to -perfection, or, if evil, are not to be corrected except by individual -regeneration. We learn of the irrationality or the moral obliquity of -discontent; the viciousness or fanaticism of impertinent persons who -seek to change things; the virtues of obedience; the obligation of -toil (specifically directed to those who are doing most of the world’s -work, for the profit of others), and of the worth, benevolence, and -indispensability of our magnates. - -The denunciation of discontent becomes more common and more emphatic. -A plentiful crop of instances is always forthcoming to any one who -cares to look for them. The generation of Rousseau and the following -generation of Jefferson set high hopes for mankind on the faculty -of discontent. The past generation, compromising between theology -and evolution, found in discontent a perpetual factor making for the -creation of a better environment. But our present reaction takes us -back to the days of the Stuarts. The magnificent invectives of Dryden, -voiced in that-- - - “full resounding line, - The long majestic march and energy divine,” - -against the sedition and discontent frequently manifested during the -reign of Charles II, might serve for a thousand texts for present-day -sermons, lectures, and editorials. The thought, common these last -hundred years, that discontent is usually the result of privation, -wrong, or oppression, is given over; and our modern moulders of opinion -revert to the notion that it is fostered by ease and comfort. - - “To what would he on quail and pheasant swell - That even on tripe and carrion could rebel?” - -asks “Glorious John” in satirizing his rival Shadwell. Tripe and -carrion did not form the usual nourishment for rebellion. We find the -same idea constantly echoed in very recent days; and the demands of -organized workmen for better pay are almost invariably regarded in -certain intellectual circles as evidences, not of need, but of the -pride and rebelliousness engendered by an already attained competency. - -Honors are even between churchmen and lay publicists, when it comes -to the denunciation of discontent. The pulpit, the stump, the -college chair, and the editorial sanctum are alike busied with its -condemnation. Perhaps a typical protagonist in the work was the late -E. L. Godkin. The thought recurs again and again in his writings. -“I must frankly say,” he avers in his essay, “Social Classes in the -Republic,” “that I know of no more mischievous person than the man who, -in free America, seeks to spread among them [the workers] the idea that -they are wronged and kept down by somebody; that somebody is to blame -because they are not better lodged, better dressed, better educated, -and have not easier access to balls, concerts, or dinner parties.” -Whereupon, to make clear his contention, he tells of the following -pathetic little episode:-- - -“Two years ago I was in one of the University Settlements in New York, -and was walking through the rooms of the society with one of the -members. They were plain and neat and suitable, and he explained to -me that the purpose in furnishing and fitting them up was to show the -workingmen the kind of rooms they ought to have ‘if justice were done.’ -To tell this to a workingman, without telling him in what the injustice -consisted and who worked it if he had not such rooms, was, I held, to -be most mischievous.” - -Even President Roosevelt, doubtless impressed by the modern reiteration -of the notion, felt called upon, in his Providence speech (August 23d), -to rebuke discontent, and incidentally to identify it with envy. “Not -only do the wicked flourish,” he says, “when the times are such that -most men flourish, but what is worse, the spirit of envy and jealousy -and hatred springs up in the breasts of those who, though they may -be doing fairly well themselves, yet see others, who are no more -deserving, doing far better.” - -Education, in the modern view, is largely responsible for discontent, -and should be restricted. Judge Simeon A. Baldwin, of the Connecticut -Supreme Court, and lecturer in the Yale Law School, is quite certain -upon this point. His “signed editorial,” in the April 9th issue of -a New York newspaper published by the Yale lecturer on journalism, -expresses a view which is coming to be widely held. Our young men, he -notes with great complacency, are obliged to leave school early, in -order to go to work; and he thereupon urges that young women also -should clip their education at an early age. “Girls would make better -wives and mothers and housekeepers,” he writes, “if they finished -school at from fourteen to sixteen years of age. As it is, they obtain -a smattering of many studies, which in my opinion cannot do them much -good. They are possessed by a spirit of unrest to-day, and develop -ambitions not compatible with the happiest homes.” - -Professor Harry Thurston Peck expresses the modern view more -succinctly. Professor Peck, it may be stated for the benefit of the -unenlightened, is an instructor of Latin in Columbia University. No -pent-up Utica, however, contracts his powers; he has courageously -sallied forth from his particular domain and has taken all knowledge -for his province. Over this province he ranges with unconstrained -freedom, noting what he will, and, with something of the “large -utterance of the early gods,” making known to a waiting world his -impressions and beliefs. What a great lexicographer said of an amiable -poet may be repeated in present praise: He touches nothing that he does -not adorn. Some intellectual limitations it is possible he may have; -but as a reflector of certain current views obtaining in high places he -is probably without a peer. In his article, “Some Phases of American -Education,” in the _Cosmopolitan_ magazine a few years ago, he put the -matter in this way:-- - -“Linked closely with many other very serious educational mistakes, -and from many points of view by far the most profoundly serious of -them all, is that curious fancy, which is almost universal among our -people, that education in itself and for all human beings is a good -and thoroughly desirable possession.... There is probably in our whole -system to-day no principle so fundamentally untrue as this, and there -is certainly none that is fraught with so much social and political -peril for the future. For education means ambition, and ambition means -discontent.” - -But, as Shakespeare’s Fluellen remarks, “the phrase is a little -variations.” All discontent is not the same, and that which stirs -in the bosom of Professor Peck must be carefully discriminated from -the sort nurtured by plain John Smith. “Nothing so dainty sweet as -lovely melancholy,” sang Sir John Fletcher; but what is meet for an -Elizabethan poet or a present-day philosopher may be most unmeet for -a common plebeian. “Now discontent,” continues this pharos of the -unenlightened, “is in itself a divine thing. When it springs up in -a strong, creative intellect, capable of translating it into actual -achievement, it is the mother of all progress; but when it germinates -in a limited and feeble brain, it is the mother of unhappiness alone.” - -Dr. Arthur Twining Hadley, president of Yale University, also has -doubts. His recent book, “The Education of the American Citizen,” might -be supposed, from its title, to be a plea for the popular diffusion -of knowledge. Such it is, in fact, only the author draws the line at -“sociology and politics and civics and finance.” “When the plea is -urged, as it so often is,” he writes, “that they constitute a necessary -and valuable training for citizenship, we are justified in making a -distinct protest. Except within the narrowest limits, they do harm -rather than good. As ordinarily taught, ... they tend to prepare -the minds of the next generation to look to superficial remedies for -political evils, instead of seeing that the only true remedy lies in -the creation of a sound public sentiment.” - -The term, “superficial remedies for political evils,” means, in plain -words, social legislation; and it brings up a second matter upon which -our moulders of opinion have made a considerable approach to unanimity. -We hear legislation flouted on all sides, and appeals made for -individual regeneration. The matter-of-fact persons who hold that sixty -years of factory acts have had more to do with establishing humane -conditions in certain quarters of the planet than nineteen hundred -years of hortatory appeals to the individual man, are dismissed with a -smile of contempt; and the declaration is made that most legislation -is mischievous, and that nothing but character counts. Mr. Godkin was -“far from denying that legislation and political changes have been the -direct means of great good,” though he held that “every good change in -legislation or in government has been preceded or brought about by an -increase of intelligence, of reasonableness, or of brotherly kindness -on the part of the people at large.” A conclusion, to say the least, -not overfreighted with historical learning, since many and perhaps most -reformatory laws have been passed by an earnest minority against the -active opposition of many, and despite the stolid passivity of most, -and what mankind has heretofore called social progress has been largely -due to the reaction of such laws and like institutions upon individual -character. - -President Hadley differs somewhat from Mr. Godkin. Too much stress, he -believes, is laid upon the mechanism of government and of industry, and -too little upon the force by which this mechanism is kept at work. - -“Not by the axioms of metaphysics on the one hand, nor by the -machinery of legislation on the other,” he writes, “can we deal with -the questions which vex human society.... Conscious of its honesty of -purpose, it [democracy] is impatient of opposition, and contemptuous of -difficulties, however real. It undertakes a vast amount of regulation -of economic and social life in fields where two generations ago a free -government would scarce have dared to enter. In these new regulations -there are many instances of failure, and relatively few of success. -We have had much infringement of personal liberty, with little or no -corresponding benefit to the community.” - -In Justice Brewer’s recent volume of Yale lectures, also, there is much -regard for character, and much even for associated work in bettering -the life of the nation. But as to legislation as a means of achieving -this betterment, there is a cautious silence. There is the declaration -that each man in free America is a ruler--glad tidings to the persons -ignorant thereof. There are some original lines,-- - - “The moulds of fate - That shape the State - And make or mar the commonweal,” - -which, though somewhat reminiscent of the good-natured Bottom’s -lines,-- - - “And Phibbus’ car - Shall shine from far - And make and mar - The foolish fates,” - -do yet body forth the noble summation:-- - - “The crowning fact, - The kingliest act - Of Freedom is the Freeman’s vote!” - -But though the freeman’s vote is a kingly prerogative, there is -no suggestion that he shall use it in initiating or passing upon -legislation for the collective good. Rather the plea is for obedience; -and the warning is of those violators of the public peace, the labor -organizations. - -So, too, Mr. Stimson. “The unexpected weakness of democratic -government,” he writes, “is its belief that statutes can amend -both nature and human nature.” And he rejoices that the judiciary, -convinced, no doubt, that neither human nature nor its manifestations -can be amended by statutes, have actively intervened by declaring many -laws unconstitutional. He finds, moreover, that the general principle -which has caused the adverse action of the courts, is that these -statutes have been “restrictive of private liberty, of the right of -a free citizen to use his own property, and his own personal powers -in such a way as he will, if so be that he do not injure others.” -A perspicuous and conclusive judgment, no doubt, considering that -the very point at issue is the matter of injury to others. He is -not satisfied with condemning legislation, moreover, but proceeds -further to a gentle remonstrance with the classes of persons who have -urged certain regulative laws. Labor leaders, he discovers, distrust -experience, and Socialists detest lucidity--a brace of acute judgments -in the face of the fact that the thing actually rated highest in -trade-union circles is experience, and that whatever the defects of -Socialists or of their system may be, the signal contributions of the -best Socialist writers to the study of political economy have been -lucidity of thought and definiteness of expression. - -So, too, Professor Sumner, Professor Walter A. Wyckoff, the -entertaining author of “The Workers,” and a host of other instructors -of the public, the mere roster of whose names would require several -pages of fine print. Of the only two safeguards of the dependent -classes against complete exploitation--social legislation and the labor -society--our moulders of opinion would seem to have taken the job of -demolishing the former, leaving to the magnates themselves the task of -attending to the latter. - -With many if not most of these publicists the criticism is delivered -not only at protective laws, but at the force behind them--democracy. -“Every age,” writes Professor Sumner, “is befooled by the notions -which are in fashion in it. Our age is befooled by ‘democracy.’ We -hear arguments about the industrial organization which are deductions -from democratic dogmas, or which appeal to prejudice by using -analogies drawn from democracy to affect sentiment about industrial -relations.” Many of our moulders of opinion elaborate the argument -often made in the writings of our literary magnates, that only men -who are themselves possessed of property should have any voice in -the disposition of wealth or the regulation of property rights. To -justify this view recourse is had to several recently imported dogmas, -fashioned by Mr. W. H. Mallock, author of “Aristocracy and Evolution.” -All increase of wealth, all advance in knowledge and virtue, contends -Mr. Mallock, come from an aristocracy--a word which he defines as -meaning the “exceptionally gifted and efficient minority, no matter -what the position in which its members may have been born, or what the -sphere of social progress in which their efficiency shows itself.” -Therefore, since the efficient have produced everything above the -maximum which the ignorant and unskilled workman can produce without -this higher aid, it follows that the efficient should be left in -untroubled possession of their holdings. The large assumption among -others in Mr. Mallock’s argument--that those who efficiently sow and -those who richly reap are the same persons--need not concern us here. -It is sufficient to point out that his argument has been eagerly taken -up by a number of our own moulders of opinion, fostered and even -developed to further conclusions. - -Professor Peck, for instance, rather heroically improving on the -spirit, and not infrequently following the text, of Mr. Mallock, puts -the matter in this way:-- - -“Every really great thing that has been accomplished in the history of -man has been accomplished by an aristocracy. It may have called itself -a sacerdotal aristocracy, or a military aristocracy, or an aristocracy -based on birth and blood, yet these distinctions were but superficial; -for in reality it always meant one thing alone--the community of -interest and effort in those whose intellectual force and innate gift -of government enabled them to dominate and control the destinies of -States, driving in harness the hewers of wood and drawers of water who -constitute the vast majority of the human race, and whose happiness is -greater and whose welfare is more thoroughly conserved when governed -than when governing.” - -The argument that the gifted produce all, and the assumption that the -wealthy and the gifted are the same persons lead up to the fervid -praise of inequality of condition which in recent years is so often -heard. Our literary magnates began the strain, doubtless with the -motive of self-justification. Since then it has been taken up by our -professional instructors--from what motive is not precisely known--and -the result is a mighty chorus of many voices. Says Professor Sumner:-- - -“If we could get rid of some of our notions about liberty and equality, -and could lay aside this eighteenth-century philosophy, according to -which human society is to be brought into a state of blessedness, we -might get some insight into the might of the societal organization: -what it does for us and what it makes us do.... If we are willing to -be taught by the facts, then the phenomena of the concentration of -wealth which we see about us will convince us that they are just what -the situation calls for. They ought to be because they are, and because -nothing else would serve the interests of society.... I often see -statements published in which the objectors lay stress upon the great -inequalities of fortune, and having set forth the contrast between rich -and poor, they rest their case. What law of nature, religion, ethics, -or the State is violated by inequalities of fortune? The inequalities -prove nothing.” - -Professor John B. Clark, of Columbia University, also sees in vast -inequalities of fortune the basis of a happy state. Aristotle taught -differently, it is true. “In human societies,” he wrote, “extremes -of wealth and poverty are the main sources of evil. The one brings -arrogance and a lack of capacity to obey; the other brings slavishness -and a lack of capacity to command. Where a population is divided -into the 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.” But -Professor Clark, touched by prophetic fire, pictures a new society in -which inequality is the great blessing. “The world of the near future,” -he writes in his recent article on “The Society of the Future,” “will -not be one with inequalities levelled out of it; and to any persons -to whom inequality of possessions seems inherently evil, this world -will not be satisfactory. It will present a condition of vast and -ever growing inequality. With a democracy that depends on a likeness -of material possessions it will have nothing in common. The rich will -continually grow richer, and the multi-millionnaires will approach -the billion-dollar standard.... If an earthly Eden is to come through -competition, it will come not in spite of, but by means of, an -enormous increase of inequality of outward possessions.” - -We must hear from Professor Peck again--and for the last time. “When -men by temper and training,” he writes in his recent paper on “The -Social Advantages of the Concentration of Wealth,” “come to possess the -ability to do large things in this direct and simple way [_i.e._, the -characteristic way, of the magnates], they have an immense advantage -over those who can work only in committees, or boards, or companies, -and they will inevitably dominate them and use them quite at will.... -This [concentration] means, in the first place and as a first result, -the aggrandizement of individuals; but in the end it means the wide -diffusion of a golden stream through every artery and vein of our -national and individual life. America has already been enormously -enriched; yet the actualities of the present are nothing when compared -with the potentialities of the future. Timid minds which are appalled -rather than inspired by the vastness and magnificence of the whole -thing shrink back and croak out puling prophecies of evil. They cannot -rise to the greatness of it all because they lack the dauntless courage -of the typical American, who, in Kipling’s vivid phrase, can always-- - - “‘Turn a keen, untroubled face - Home to the instant need of things.’” - - -III - -So much for a consensus of some of our notable instructors of the -public on things political and social. That these opinions produce -a powerful influence on the mass, no one will deny. The wide respect -in which our teachers--particularly our commissioned teachers--are -held; the general recognition of their learning, their profundity, -their unquestioned liberty to speak what they will, their insulated -freedom from the influences arising out of seigniorial endowments, -compel a popular deference to their judgments. It is, therefore, -with pained surprise that an American reads an uncharitable comment -on their ability and learning. Such a comment is that which appeared -last February in the conservative and ably edited Paris _Temps_. “It -is true,” writes its editor, “that American universities pay great -attention to social and political sciences. It is no less true that -they have at their disposal considerable financial resources for the -publication of reviews. But the question is to know what the reviews -and teachings are worth.... I believe myself sufficiently conversant -with the matter. By professional duty I read, not everything which is -printed on the other side of the Atlantic concerning these subjects, -but a notable part of the work which is considered the most weighty. -With a few honorable exceptions--honorable, but rare--I must venture to -say that these publications are, for the most part, without originality -and without any real value. - -“I imagine American professors will be the first to feel surprise at -the great honor [the establishment of a French school in America] -which it is proposed to do them. They have a very keen feeling of -what they owe to European culture. They keep in close touch with all -that is published in their respective specialties in France, Germany, -England, and Italy. They profit by such publications, of which their -own are sometimes--let us say things as they are--only adaptations -or reflections. Many of them have had their intellectual training in -old Europe, and had, at their start, no other ambition than to model -themselves on their masters and repeat them. The development of social -and political studies is immense--on the surface--in the United States. -In depth it is not quite the same.” - -The _Temps_, it may be remarked, is not, on the one hand, radical, nor -on the other, anti-democratic or anti-American; and so the reasons for -its illiberal and discourteous judgment must be left undiscerned. Its -startling declaration, that the sociological pronouncements of our -distinguished teachers “are, for the most part, without originality -and without any real value,” rises to the dignity of a national -affront, and rightly calls for emphatic action from our strenuous State -Department. - - -IV - -It may be doubted if our commissioned teachers exert so great an -influence upon opinion as do our newspapers. “The newspaper to-day,” -said Archbishop Ireland recently before the National Educational -Association, “is preëminently the mentor of the people; it is read by -all; it is believed by nearly all. Its influence is paramount; its -responsibility is tremendous.” There is much truth in this dictum, -though something of qualification is needed. The newspaper, though not -“read by all,” nor “believed by nearly all,” is indeed more widely read -than ever before. If the census is to be believed, the circulation per -issue of all daily, tri-weekly, semi-weekly, and weekly publications -has grown in the last ten years from 38,000,000 to 58,000,000 copies. -This is certainly a tremendous showing; but it is doubtful if the -newspapers exert the direct sway over men’s minds which was exerted -in earlier years. The influence effected is due less to the formal -expression of opinion than to the color habitually given by them to the -news. The eager question, “What does old Greeley say?” which was once -so often heard, was a tribute to the power of an individual in whose -rectitude and wisdom many thousands put a rarely wavering faith. Many -a lesser editor had also his reverent disciples, who believed as he -taught and voted as he urged. - -But in our day the direct appeal of the newspaper is more hesitatingly -obeyed. Frequently it has happened, in municipal elections, that a -candidate or candidates have been elected in the face of an almost -solid opposition of the press. A newspaper may be patronized for -this or that special feature by persons who pay no attention to its -editorials, by others who read them merely to learn an opposing view -of things, and by others still--a far larger class--who, reading -between the lines, choose for themselves what to rely upon and what to -doubt. All the larger cities, and perhaps most of the smaller, have -instances of newspapers which, appealing to some special interest, -secure a considerable number of readers antipathetic to the political -views expressed. It happens that radicals often read conservative -publications, and that conservatives sometimes look upon radical -print. The faithful devotees of a certain mercurial New York newspaper -probably read it as eagerly in 1884, when it supported General Butler -for the Presidency, as in 1892, when it supported Mr. Cleveland, -or in 1896, when it went over to Major McKinley. But reliance upon -editorial opinions is a wavering faith. A wiser discrimination is -employed, a more cynical scepticism is maintained. When the New York -newspaper which boasts of printing all the fit news publishes in its -editorial columns the dictum that “the oversupply of labor in the -anthracite region is due to the great attractiveness of the wages and -the conditions of work,” none but the willing are convinced; and so for -all the misjudgments, ignorant or deliberate, that are daily put forth -by newspapers of all classes there are scoffers and sceptics as well as -credulous believers. - -For the recognition has become general that the average newspaper is -owned and operated as a commercial property. As Mr. Brooke Fisher, in -a recent number of the _Atlantic_, writes, the days when the editor -hired the publisher are gone; it is now the publisher who hires the -editor, and the counting-room determines the policy. Advertising is the -material mainstay, and the merchants and magnates who have largesse -to distribute must be humored. “Publishers,” says the interesting -census bulletin on “Printing and Publishing,” “are depending more on -advertising and less on subscriptions and sales for financial return.” -Whether it be the sensational “yellows,” or the less sensational but -characterless “pinks,” or the staid and ponderous “grays” of the press, -the same rule holds. Even the religious journals make a like appeal. -“A superfluity of religious weeklies,” says the best-known publication -of that class, giving itself a left-handed pat on the shoulder, “with -no other basis for existence than sectional or partisan pride, will -not be tolerated nor supported by the laity; nor will advertisers -much longer fail to discriminate between religious journals that are -progressive [meaning, for example, itself] and are reaching well-to-do -and intelligent people, and those which are not.” Statements of -enormous sales, of vast subscription lists, are published in glaring -type, and the phrase “greatest circulation in the city,” or State, or -nation, or world, is trumpeted to the ears of the buyers of advertising -space. There is still an appeal to the giver of largesse even when a -publication cannot honestly boast of great circulation; the argument is -then one of a “select” patronage--of “fit audience, though few,” but -inferentially of great purchasing power. - -The pressure upon editorial policy of this deference to the advertiser -is constant and effective, and the result is apparent to most readers. -Even the more rampant of the “yellows,” which daily shriek against -political and social injustice, are affected by it. As mournful a -philosopher as Heraclitus might have found food for humor in the -manœuvres of the metropolitan newspapers some six years ago during the -agitation for the passage of the Andrews bill. This measure required -seats for women workers in all mercantile establishments. Now it -happened that the heads of the department stores were in nearly every -instance violently opposed to the bill, and it also happened that the -amount of advertising from the great stores cut a very pretty figure -in the income of the average metropolitan newspaper. To complete the -dilemma the bill won great favor from the public. How the masterful -purveyors of news and opinions to the people managed to extricate -themselves from the difficulty, would make too long a story in the -telling. But that they triumphantly surmounted it, is a matter of -history. - -With the advertiser in so commanding a position, it is not needed -that a newspaper shall be owned by a magnate in order that it shall -faithfully reflect the special interests of “business.” Yet that -seigniorial funds are back of many of our important newspapers is a -fact which to a person of intelligence needs no proof. The census -bulletin, revealing the characteristic optimism of the compilers of the -Twelfth Census, will have it that individual ownership is still the -rule. The proportion of individually owned and operated publications -is given as 63.3 per cent, of partnership concerns as 19.7 per cent, -and of corporate concerns as 17 per cent. “These figures indicate,” -we are told, “the complete absence of the extended combinations and -consolidations so frequently encountered in other industries.” Yet -there are combinations, whether individually or jointly owned,--the -Hearst newspapers in San Francisco, Chicago, and New York, the Ochs -newspapers of Chattanooga, New York, and Philadelphia, the Belo -newspapers of Texas, and those of the Scripps-McRae concern in the -middle West. Only this last summer public announcement was made of a -projected combination--under the control of Mr. P. F. Collier, and -with a capital of $1,000,000--of a large number of country newspapers -in the State of New York. The project has for the time been given up, -but others of a like nature may fairly be expected for the future. -Moreover, some of the features of the industrial combinations--identity -of product, for instance--are discoverable in the so-called coöperative -newspapers, which make use of plate matter or “patent-insides.” More -than half of all the periodicals of the country are in this class. -Finally, the chief commodity of newspapers of all classes--the news--is -a trust product, a commodity in which the Associated Press serves -the function of gatherer of raw material and manufacturer, and the -periodical the function of assorter and retailer. - -But the census figures reveal little or nothing to the point. -Seigniorial backing, when actually given, is not usually made visible -in the form of investment in newspaper stock. It is not to the best -interests of the purveyor of news and opinions that it should be; for -the public, with a fine sense of its own independence of judgment, -requires that seigniorial influence shall be less obviously shown. -The odor of Standard oil, the fumes of American tobacco, have proved -fatal to more than one newspaper enterprise, and even the taint of -railroad support has been shown to be harmful. There is thus the -greatest need of discretion in arranging the nominal ownership; and -the result is, that in many cases it is easier to discover the actual -ownership of a policy game than the actual ownership of a newspaper. -The curious can but surmise and wonder. When a chaste and well-ordered -daily publication gives to a particular magnate’s house-warming the -space of a column and a half, while its rivals--even the “yellows,” -which deal in that sort of thing--consider the event worth no more -than a half-column; or when another magnate is persistently “boomed” -for a high office, or when for another a franchise grant is skilfully -proposed, one may put two and two together, and apply the natural -inferences. Inferences, however, are not proof, and the conclusion must -remain doubtful. - -But whether through the influence of potential advertising or of secret -ownership, the magnate, or the magnate class, exercises a large measure -of control, and the matter which appears is that which, on the whole, -is agreeable to seigniorial minds. The coal magnates may be criticised, -but it is not so much on account of their refusal to grant concessions -to their men as for their failure to operate in defiance of their men. -So, too, the trusts come in for occasional rough handling; but it is -the abstract trust that is at fault: the individual trust usually goes -scathless. Certain of the “yellows” furnish some exception to the -general rule, though here, too, the influence of the great advertiser -is shown, and one may vainly read the columns of the most radical of -the anti-monopoly dailies for a suggestion that the great department -stores are other than abodes of comfort and joy for all the souls -employed therein. - -Such is the newspaper bias, and the product of the hired writer must -conform. Whether editing news or writing opinions, he must recognize -the divinity that hedges in the magnate class. It was a savage, and -in some respects extravagant, picture of the function of the hired -newspaper worker which a brilliant journalist, now deceased, gave to -the world a few years ago:-- - -“There is no such thing in America as an independent press, unless it -is out in the country towns. I am paid for keeping honest opinions -out of the paper I am connected with. Other editors are paid similar -salaries for doing similar things. If I should allow honest opinions -to be printed in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my -occupation, like Othello’s, would be gone. The man who would be so -foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the street hunting -for another job. The business of a New York journalist is to distort -the truth, lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet -of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread, -or for about the same thing, his salary. We are the tools of vassals -of the rich men behind the scenes. We are jumping-jacks. They pull -the strings, and we dance. Our time, our talents, our lives, our -possibilities, are all the property of other men. We are intellectual -prostitutes.” - -But though in certain respects extravagant, it has yet faithful and -accurate touches which are recognizable by every undeluded person -who earns his living in the employment of the daily press. Perhaps, -indeed, there are not many of the undeluded; for the recoil upon -themselves of the character of their tasks does not, to say the -least, sharpen the edge of conscience, and the service of a few -years is generally believed to be effective in indurating the finest -sensibilities. - -It is not, as has been said, so much through their editorial -expressions as through their coloring of the news that the weeklies and -dailies mould the opinions of the mass. A growing scepticism averts -the former influence; but against the latter there is no prophylactic. -News is assorted, pruned, improved, to accord with a predetermined -policy. From an anti-imperialist publication one gets small notion of -other happenings in the Philippines than devastations, rapes, battle, -murder, and sudden death; and from an administration organ one may -learn only of Peace piping her “languid note,” of the diffusion of -education, and the progress of industry, varied only now and then by -slight outbreaks from a few ladrones. In the far more important matter -of the irrepressible class conflict here at home, like influences color -the news; and as ninety-nine out of every one hundred periodicals -support, in greater or less degree, the existing régime, the impress -upon the public mind is overwhelming. Some of the “yellows” set up a -bar to the universal pervasion of this influence; and the activities -of the social reformers, through their weekly journals, their tracts, -and their public discussions, somewhat affect it. But, on the whole, -these effects are but a ripple on the deep and powerful stream that -fertilizes the opinions of the public. - - -V - -Our laudatory stump orators have their measure of influence on social -thought, no doubt; but it is one that surely declines, and the subject -may be passed with but scant mention. Likewise, the heterogeneous -small fry of seigniorial retainers in the various walks of life, -whose business it is, in season and out, to glorify the prevailing -régime, may be noticed and dismissed in a sentence. The influence -of the pulpit, however, is a subject that requires some attention. -This influence, while greater than that of either of the groups just -mentioned, is unquestionably less than that of either the editors or -the professional lay publicists. Among practical men in the upper -orders there is a widespread prejudice against pastoral interference -in social and political matters, unless it be directed solely to -seigniorial justification. The shoemaker should stick to his last, -runs the adage; and no less it is urged that the pastor should stick -to his text. He should, furthermore, discriminate and sort his texts, -making careful avoidance of the ethical precepts of Jesus. For these -are needlessly disturbing to the code that prevails in commerce and -politics, and both politicians and magnates resent their citation. A -future “popular” version of the Bible may eliminate them, and thus do -away with a fertile cause of discord; but until that is done the better -part of pastoral valor will continue to lie in discretion. - -The sentiments of the politicians and the magnates toward the pulpit -filter down to the common mass of the laity, and still further weaken -pastoral influence. But weakened as it has been, it is yet felt by the -magnates to be an instrument of social control which by proper use can -be made to perform a needed service. A constant pressure is, therefore, -brought to bear upon pastoral utterances. It is the “safe” men who are -in most request to fill pulpits; and it is the “safe” men who draw to -their churches the largest endowments. Under the influence of this -pressure there has gradually been developed a code of pulpit ethics, -outside the limits of which no prudent minister will dare range. The -minister may be “long” on spirituality, but he must be “short” on -social precepts. He may preach faith, hope, and charity, and also the -future punishment of the unregenerate, so long as unregeneracy is -depicted in general terms; but he must avoid, with the nicest delicacy, -the mention of tax-dodging and stock-watering as punishable sins. -He may denounce violence, and for a modern instance he may cite the -occasional riotous conduct of striking workmen; but let him at his -peril cite such venial backslidings from grace as the blowing up of a -competitor’s refinery, the seizure of a street for track-laying, or -the employment of armed mercenaries for a private purpose. Political -evils may be denounced in the abstract, and the bribery of voters in -the concrete. The latter is an offence usually committed by irreverent -ward politicians, and may justly receive, without injury to the State -and to society, the scathing anathemas of the pulpit. But he that in -a moment of inadvertence miscalls by the name bribes the “gentle -rewards,” the “gratuities,” as they were known in Bacon’s time, which -magnates frequently bestow upon legislators and judges, had best resign -his pastorate and seek some other field. Nor must any slight be thrown -upon any of the conventional practices in the ordinary daily conduct -of “business.” These are hallowed by custom, and are beyond criticism. -Such a declaration as that of a certain minister in a recent number -of the _Christian Endeavor World_--“What we call Napoleonic genius in -business is sometimes simply whitewashed highway robbery on a gigantic -scale”--verges closely upon contumacy. It is relieved slightly by -the qualifying “sometimes,”--much virtue in your “sometimes,” as the -immortal bard would remark,--but for all that, it is a dangerous -utterance, and one apt to cause its enunciator grave trouble. - -But pastoral pronouncements on social questions are permitted--nay, -welcomed--if only they properly rebuke the occasional discontent and -unquiet of the masses and the aggression of those foes of order, the -labor unions. Such a pronouncement, for instance, is that of the Rev. -Lyman Abbott, put forth in his recent philosophical disquisition, -“The Rights of Man.” “Trades-unions ... are ruled over generally,” -he declares, “by a directory scarcely less absolute than that -which governed the revolutionists in the day of Mirabeau.” This is -unexceptionably decorous, and runs no risk whatever of seigniorial -censorship. The recent coal strike brought forth a large number of -pastoral utterances of a like character, which must ultimately redound -to the great glory of the declaimers. The good Bishop Potter, in his -address before the Diocesan convention in New York City, September 24, -felt called upon to rebuke envy and hatred and to deny the existence -of social classes in the republic: “Wealth is unequally distributed, -we are told, and the sophistries that are born of envy and hatred are -hawked about the streets to influence, in a land which refuses to -enthrone one class above another, the passions of the less clever or -thrifty or industrious against those who are more so.” The eminent -Dr. Ethelbert Talbot, Bishop of the Episcopal Church in Central -Pennsylvania, according to his public letter of September 28, saw in -the coal strike only a demand upon the part of the miners “that the -operators shall no longer manage their own business.” “How can the -question of whether a man has a right to conduct his own business,” -he asks, with painfully defective forethought for what subsequently -happened, “be submitted to arbitration?” The no less eminent Rev. -Dr. Newell Dwight Hillis, in his recent address before the Chicago -Society of New York, demanded a wall of bayonets from Washington to -Wilkesbarre. The Rev. Dr. Minot J. Savage of the Church of the Messiah -also called for arms instead of arbitration, and the Rev. Dr. W. R. -Huntington of Grace Church echoed the good Bishop Talbot’s opinion, -and “from the point of view of simple justice” could not see “that we -have any reason to blame the mine-owners for refusing to allow the -management of their own business to be taken out of their hands.” -From Calvary, too,--or at least from the Calvary Baptist Church of -New York,--came a further demand for soldiery. “These labor leaders,” -declared the Rev. Dr. R. S. MacArthur, “with their large salaries, are -forcing the men to be idle. They are more tyrannical than the Czar -of Russia.” These are but samples of the “safe” utterances on social -questions--the kind that involve no penalties, but on the contrary, -reap sure harvests of glory and recompense. - -Occasionally from too close and exclusive reading of the synoptic -gospels, with their recital of Jesus’ specific teachings on social -matters, a young and ardent minister loses his perspective, and seeing -over-large the industrial and social evils of his time, seeks to remedy -them. Usually, however, the mood is but transitory, and a few months, -or at most a few years, witness the reaction. Renunciation of heretical -doctrines follows, and ultimately the errant is restored to the fold of -the “safe.” But let no one imagine that in seigniorial halls his sins -are remembered against him. On the contrary, there is more joy over the -recovery of one strayed sheep than over ninety and nine that remain -faithful. - -Sometimes, it must be conceded, there are to be found those who refuse -to be forced or cajoled, and who hold their intrepid way in defiance of -power. The World assails them, in the words of Matthew Arnold, with its -perpetual challenge and warning:-- - - “‘Behold,’ she cries, ‘so many rages lulled; - So many fiery spirits quite cooled down. - Look how so many valors, long undulled, - After short commerce with me fear my frown.’” - -But they fear not her frown; and they teach the social precepts -of their Master regardless of material consequences. What those -consequences are, the average man knows full well. They are ostracism, -a reduction, sooner or later, to the poorest livings; a hemming in -and constraining to the narrowest fields of effort and influence--in -a word, the full sum of the forceful rebuke which it is possible for -the magnate class and its retainers, in the present state of society, -to deliver. In the more developed state of the future the rebuke will -be yet more emphatic; for the influence of the pulpit, whatever it may -be in degree, must in kind be confirmatory of the right of the magnate -class to rule. - - - - -CHAPTER VIII GENERAL SOCIAL CHANGES - - -The historic props of class rule, according to Professor Edward -A. Ross, in his recent volume, “Social Control,” have been force, -superstition, fraud, pomp, and prescription. Our present seigniorial -class makes use, with fine discrimination as time and occasion require, -of each of these means of support, though unquestionably it sets the -greatest value upon the last named. Force is employed less openly, -less obviously; decreasingly by the direct imposition of the magnates, -increasingly through their ingenious manipulation of the powers of the -State. The superstition latent in most minds proves now, as ever, a -means of ready recourse; but though supernatural sanction to the acts -and authority of the magnates is cunningly deduced and volubly preached -from a thousand pulpits, the prop fails somewhat as a constant and sure -reliance. Even testimony so authoritative as that of President Baer -to the effect that the Great First Cause had intrusted to himself and -his co-magnates the control of the business interests of the country, -has been flouted in a number of places. The notion of supernatural -sanctions, as most people know, and as Professor Goldwin Smith has -repeatedly taken pains to point out, is losing its hold upon the -reason of mankind; and though it still has, and will ever have, a -certain potency, its best days are passed. - -As for fraud, both of class against class, and individual against -individual, attempts to practise it no doubt increase; but the -tooth-and-claw struggle of the last generation has developed and -sharpened the wits of the combatants, so that it tends to become a -less profitable game. He would be a sharper indeed, according to the -proverb, who among the Turks of the Negropont, the Jews of Salonika, or -the Greeks of Athens could cheat his fellow: each knows by heart all -the tricks and devices of which the others are capable. Matters are not -yet at such a stage in free America: great frauds, both of the group -and of the individual, are still practised. But the almost infinite -possibilities of other days have been sadly restricted by the operation -of those natural laws which tend to fit beings to their environment. -Pomp, too, is less a factor of control than in past times. It has a -powerful grip on the imaginations of the poor, as the columns of our -“yellow” journals, which devote so large a space to the ceremonies of -the great, amply attest; but though it charms the more, it deceives the -less. It interests, it delights; but it does not overawe or subdue. - - -I - -It is by prescription--by a constant appeal to the sanctity of custom, -a constant preaching of the validity of vested rights, and of the -beauty, order, inevitability, and righteousness of things as they -are--that the magnate class wins to its support the suffrages of the -people. Other influences aid, but this one is dominant. As Professor -Ross pertinently writes:-- - -“Those who have the sunny rooms in the social edifice have ... a -powerful ally in the suggestion of Things-as-they-are. With the aid of -a little narcotizing teaching and preaching, the denizens of the cellar -may be brought to find their lot proper and right, to look upon escape -as an outrage upon the rights of other classes, and to spurn with moral -indignation the agitator who would stir them to protest. Great is the -magic of precedent, and like the rebellious Helots, who cowered at -the sight of their masters’ whips, those who are used to dragging the -social chariot will meekly open their calloused mouths whenever the bit -is offered them.” - -The magnates, as has been shown, brook small interference with -prevailing customs. Their near dependents, retainers, and “poor -relations” think as they think, and feel as they feel; and the great -majority of the professional moulders of opinion, drawing their -inspiration from above, preach and teach as the magnates would have -them. The general social passivity following the pressure of all these -influences upon the public mind is as certain and inescapable as a -mathematical conclusion. - - -II - -A powerful auxiliary to the preaching of the sanctity of custom -is the extolling of individual “success.” At the very time when -socio-industrial processes are settling to a fixed routine and -socio-industrial forms to a fixed status,--when day by day there is -found less room at the top and more room at the bottom,--the chorus of -exhortation to the men of the land to bestir themselves reaches its -highest pitch. Meddle not with custom and the law, is the injunction; -leave those to abler and wiser heads--meaning, of course, the present -formulators and manipulators thereof. Meddle not with things as they -are, but while your companions sleep, “toil upward in the night,” -and carve out a career for yourself among the stars. Put no faith in -general social changes, except such as result from the combined effect -of each unit concerning himself solely with his own material salvation. -There is no social betterment without precedent individual betterment, -it is urged. “You cannot make a bad man good by legislation,” is the -admonitory adage, and “You cannot make a poor man rich by legislation” -is its twin. If certain persons hold to the theory that corrective laws -have a definite reaction upon character, and that in every civilization -worthy the name there are social institutions, founded in law, which -are immeasurably in advance of the general average of sanity, sobriety, -and honesty of the citizenship, such persons are but dreamers, and are -not to be taken too seriously. So, too, with the dictum regarding the -statutory enhancement of riches. There are those who insinuate that -it is heard most often from the lips of the industrial magnates, the -majority of whom are living examples of the fact that riches may be -garnered by means of tariffs and other privilege-giving laws; and from -the _laissez-faire_ tariff reformers, whose reiterated argument against -protective duties is that they are law-given privileges by which the -few gain wealth at the expense of the many. But persons who question -this profound adage are unsophisticated. They fail to discriminate -properly. The adage is one which, like a simile or metaphor, should not -be stretched too far. It has its true and legitimate bearing only when -it is applied to the very poor. - -Personal endeavor toward the goal of “success” is the urgent -exhortation. Scarcely one of the magnates who have recently entered -literature, or who, avoiding that province, have on occasion unbosomed -themselves to the interviewer, but takes pains to declare how numerous -and how mighty are the possibilities in the path of the energetic. -All that is needed, according to most of the seigniorial recipes, -are brains and health; honesty, it is true, is often included as an -ingredient in the compound, but its mention is possibly ironical, and -need not concern us. Brains and health are thus the two things needful; -and though pursuing Satan may gather in, with his drag-net, a vast -army of the hindmost, the fortunate possessors of these two boons will -inevitably forge to the front in the headlong race. - -It is by no accident that this particular counsel from the magnates -is heard now more frequently than any other. It is one that of course -has been given in all times; but it has never been given with such -frequency and unction as now. Consciously or subconsciously, it is -an expression of class feeling--a revelation of the community of -interests and purposes of a particular division of our society. In -whatever cases its utterance is prompted by a general social motive, -that motive is the defence of class control. It is counsel that makes -for the acquiescence of the lower orders and the increased security of -the upper. “The heaving and straining of the wretches pent up in the -hold of the slaver is less,” writes Professor Ross again, “if now and -then a few of the most redoubtable are let up on deck. Likewise the -admitting of a few brave, talented, or successful commoners into the -charmed circle above has a wonderful effect in calming the rage and -envy of the exploited, and thereby prolonging the life of the parasitic -system.” This counsel of endeavor, promulgated by the few who have -striven and “succeeded,” is thus a social sedative of great efficacy. - -The professional moulders of opinion take their cue from these -exhortations of the magnates, improve, elaborate, and redistribute -them. The professors, the editors, and the orators lead, and the -hortatory pronouncements of the pulpit follow closely. The Carpenter of -Nazareth, it is true, held other views of “success”; but his precepts -would seem to have gone out of fashion in the fanes and tabernacles -ostensibly devoted to his worship. With all ranks and conditions -Success becomes the great god; and as though there were not already -priests and votaries enough for his proper worship, a special class -of publications has recently arisen, which serve as his vowed and -consecrated ministers. These teach to the devout but unsophisticated -followers of the great god the particular means best adapted to win -his grace; how his frown may be averted; or, if his anger be kindled, -by what penances and other rites he is to be propitiated. They chant -the praises and recite the life-incidents of those who have been most -conspicuously blessed, and to all the rest of mankind they shout, -“Follow our counsel, and some day you shall be even like unto these.” -It is a glittering lure, and it is eagerly pursued. Sometimes, indeed, -not without doubts and misgivings; for a recognition that “all the -gates are thronged with suitors,” that “all the markets overflow,” -and that the settling and hardening of socio-industrial processes has -already begun, becomes more general, and leads many to essay the trial -of fortune’s pathway only as a desperate and forlorn adventure. But -these are the exceptions; the majority are still to be caught by limed -twigs. The gods denied mankind many gifts, and attached hard conditions -to most of those which they granted. But for all their withholding of -certain gifts and their tainting of others, they sought to compensate -by giving an extra allowance of credulity. - - -III - -Not only by the showering of precepts, by the encouragement of -individual effort, and by the dangling of more or less illusory prizes -before the wistful multitude does the ruling class maintain its hold. -It invites, to some extent, a participation in the harvest. The growth -of the shareholding class, of which mention has already been made, is -by no means wholly fortuitous. New companies of small initial capital, -and with somewhat dubious chances in the great struggle, may be glad -enough to market their shares wheresoever they can; but something of -seigniorial grace and condescension, though not entirely unmixed with -calculating foresight, is apparent in the opening of opportunities -for small investment in the larger and more stable corporations. -Mr. John B. C. Kershaw, in the _Fortnightly Review_ for May, 1900, -gives an interesting account of this fostering of share-investment in -England. The industrial magnates, he says, saw that the best policy for -preventing the growth of a public sentiment favoring the encroachments -of labor would be to increase the number of _bourgeoisie_ interested in -industrial affairs. Accordingly they encouraged popular share-buying, -with the result that “a large and increasing proportion of the general -public is now financially involved in all industrial struggles, and our -manufacturers feel assured that the danger lest the workers should be -backed by a solid and enthusiastic public opinion in their demands for -shorter hours or increased pay no longer exists.” - -As in England, so also here. The movement toward corporate ownership -is probably more pronounced in the United States than in the older -country, and it has been equally encouraged from above. Joint-stock -concerns increased in England from 9344 in 1885 to 25,267 in 1898. In -Massachusetts, the State in which the preparation of statistics most -nearly approaches the methods of science, corporations are reported -to have increased during the years 1885-95 by more than 77 per cent. -As for shareholders, the nine principal manufacturing industries of -Massachusetts for the same period show percentages of increase ranging -from 13.87 in tapestry to 637.74 in leather, saddles, and harness. The -entire country has shown a marked growth in the number of this class, -and it would seem that no one is too poor to hold a share in some -corporation. Indeed, to read the arguments of the legal retainers of -the magnates in the Income Tax case, and in the various trust cases -that from time to time arise, one would think that the main body of -the shareholders of the nation was composed of workingmen, widows, and -orphans. In no time since the prophet Ezekiel’s day have there been -uttered words of such tender consideration for the poor and needy, -the widow and the orphan, and of such bitter denunciation for their -would-be despoilers as were tearfully put forth in opposing the income -tax. - -A great number of shareholders in a particular company would seem, -on first thought, to be something of a nuisance. Unquestionably they -would represent a wide range of conflicting views and antagonistic -purposes, all bearing upon the one problem of the proper operation -of the company’s property; and would thus give salient instances of -that unwisdom which is too often found in a multitude of counsellors. -At least this is the seigniorial argument against national -collectivism--an argument which one might naturally suppose to be quite -as applicable to the particular collectivism of the stock company. But -it does not so apply; the solid advantages of diffused shareholding in -assuring general public sanction to the acts of the magnates outweigh -the confusion and danger which are alleged to lie in public ownership. - -The social and political effect of this general participation in the -ownership of industries may be readily observed by all but the blind. -“If the truth were known,” wrote that keen-witted financier, Mr. -Russell Sage, in a magazine article published last May, “concentration -of wealth is popular with the masses.” Partners in the great -enterprises, the multitude of petty shareholders are led more and more -to consider economic questions from the employers’ standpoint. In the -controversies between labor and capital ten years ago the average -citizen was but an onlooker, sometimes a weak partisan of capital, but -very often a neutral, with a strong latent sympathy for the “under -dog.” To-day, thanks to his holding of a single share in the steel -corporation or of two or three shares in some street railway company, -he is an employer, one of the men “to whom God, in His infinite wisdom, -has given the control of the property interests of the country.” He -sees, thinks, and feels as a member, however humble, of the employing -class; and what the magnates think and do is to him all the law and -the prophets. “Bound by gold chains about the feet” of his feudatory -lords, he is at the same time a sharer in their responsibilities and a -faithful retainer in their service. - - -IV - -It would be idle to declare that all the tendencies make toward -acquiescence. Just as in the atmosphere a prevailing drift of the -wind is accompanied by cross currents, flurries, and rotatory motions, -so the dominant tendency discoverable in social industry is qualified -by many complex processes. Of the cross currents here to be briefly -noted, some are but trifling, while others undoubtedly reveal a -certain force and constancy. A small part of the public is ever in a -state of ferment over imputed social evils, and at rare times this -ferment becomes general. Recurring labor troubles indicate that the -spirit of resistance, if it really be dying, dies hard. Strikes of the -magnitude of those at Homestead and in the Tennessee mines in 1892, -at Chicago and other railroad centres in 1894, the several anthracite -coal strikes of 1897, 1900, and 1902, and the steel strike of 1901 -prove that organized labor has not wholly succumbed to the encompassing -forces about it. The remarkable growth in numbers, these last two -years, of the unions composing the American Federation of Labor, is -confirmatory testimony. Radical political movements, furthermore, have -not been wanting. The Socialists have increased their voting strength -in the nation from some 2000 ballots in 1888 to upward of 130,000 in -1900. The Farmers’ Alliance made tremendous headway in the election -of 1890, and its political successor, the People’s party, secured -by fusion more than 1,000,000 votes in 1892 and nearly 2,000,000 in -1894. “Labor” mayors and even Socialist mayors have been elected -in several cities, and the polling of 106,721 votes for Samuel M. -Jones for Governor of Ohio in 1899 was a truly remarkable showing -of the residual independence of the citizenship. There are also -general social movements to chronicle. Reform societies and clubs are -occasionally heard of; arbitration movements have met with some favor; -there has been a considerable growth in the number of university and -college settlements; and anti-trust conferences and things of that -sort have frequently met, talked, and dispersed. Indeed, all of us -at times grumble and find fault with general conditions. Even Mr. -Russell Sage, in the face of his exultant panegyric on the beneficence -of combination, has very recently given to the press a statement -denouncing the further consolidation of industry, and predicting, in -case his words are not heeded, “widespread revolt of the people and -subsequent financial ruin unequalled in the history of the world.” -Though only a few of us are irreconcilable at all times, all of us -are disaffected sometimes--especially when our particular interests -are pinched. We talk threateningly of instituting referendums to -curb excessive power, of levying income taxes, or of compelling the -Government to acquire the railroads and the telegraphs. We subscribe -to newspapers and other publications which criticise the acts of the -great corporations, and we hail as a new Gracchus the ardent reformer -who occasionally comes forth for a season to do battle for the popular -cause. - - -V - -It must be confessed, however, that this revolt is, for the most part, -sentimental; it is a mental attitude only occasionally transmutable -into terms of action. It is, moreover, sporadic and flickering; it -dies out, after a time, and we revert to our usual moods, concerning -ourselves with our particular interests, and letting the rest of -the world wag as it will. The specific social reaction of the last -few years has been especially marked. It has shown itself in the -weakening or disruption of radical political movements, in the more -hesitant attitude of the trade-unionists, in the decline of factory -legislation,--in fact, of all legislation tending to the protection -of the weaker and the regulation of the stronger,--and in a general -feeling of the futility of social effort. The Anti-imperialists will -have it that this admitted reaction is due to the South African and -Philippine wars, to a lust of empire and a contempt for the rights -of weaker peoples. It is a pretty theory, but unfortunately it has -small basis in chronology. For the reaction had already become -apparent before either war was waged. The date of its beginning may -be variously guessed at; but it is probable that the time assigned -to it in Chapter V--somewhere within the two years 1896-97--is not -far wrong. Before that time a very large part of the public could -occasionally be interested in social measures and movements, and in -social literature. Thousands of even the most hardened philistines read -Mr. George’s “Progress and Poverty,” Mr. Bellamy’s “Looking Backward,” -and Mr. Kidd’s “Social Evolution.” And as for that minor section of -the public, the social reformers, there was then to be found among -them a radicalism of belief, a definiteness of aim, an ardency and -determination of spirit that are sadly wanting now. Doubtless to every -one of these, as he ruefully compares the two periods, there recurs the -sentiment of the Wordsworthian recollection,-- - - “Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive, - But to be young was very heaven.” - -While in the bosom of every devotee of Things-as-they-are there rises -the sentiment of thankfulness that the mass of the people have learned -the wisdom of letting well enough alone. - -Political radicalism reached its culminating point in the election -of 1896. Despite certain foolish and mischievous notions embodied in -the two radical platforms of that year, the combined movement was -yet a consistent and unified attack upon class rule. The elections -of the next two years revealed a waning of Populist and Democratic -strength, and in 1900 a fine sense of caution prompted the Fusionists -to subordinate the industrial demands of their platforms to the issue -of Imperialism. The Socialists, it is true, usually increase their -vote; but the admitted fact of a great growth of Socialist conviction -throughout the land makes these slight increases at the polls appear -but trivial, and only further confirms the view that such radicalism -is sentimental rather than potential. Anti-trust conferences are not -without an element of humor; at least, they are the cause of much -humor in outsiders; and the widely heralded arbitration court of the -National Civic Federation breaks down on the very occasion when most is -expected of it--that of the anthracite coal strike. Organized labor, -despite its greater numerical strength, is far less aggressive than -of old; and except in isolated instances, it observes a caution which -would have further distinguished Fabius. As for the growth of college -settlements, the fact is only an added proof of reaction. They do a -great good, unquestionably; but their basis is philanthropy and not -social adjustment. - -As a people, we have heard enough, for the time, about social -problems, and prefer to interest ourselves in other matters. -Professor Walter A. Wyckoff, who has recently changed the scene of -his optimistic observances from America to England, has an article -in the September _Scribner’s_ on the English social situation. “The -condition-of-the-people problem,” he writes, “lacks vitality for the -moment because, as one shrewd observer remarked, ‘the public has -grown tired of the poor.’” We are feeling the same weariness here. -Our benevolence somewhat increases, and we are willing to give, and -more than willing that the magnates shall give freely; but we want to -be troubled no more with remedial schemes. Rather, we are disposed to -trust to seigniorial wisdom and virtue to set things right. Some of us -will perhaps decline to go so far in our trust as a certain prominent -Massachusetts lady who proposed to abolish working-class suffrage. “I -think,” said this lady in an address to a club of working girls, “many -of the troubles between employer and men might be swept away if the -men could not vote. If he felt that they did not stand on just the -same footing as himself, that they had not quite so many privileges as -he, the employer might have a chivalric feeling toward them.” Some of -us may hesitate at this project, but withal we are willing to trust -largely to seigniorial guidance. - -Instead of the personal fidelity that characterized the older -Feudalism, we are rapidly developing a class fidelity. History may -repeat itself, as the adage runs; but not by identical forms and -events. It is not likely that personal fidelity, as once known, can -ever be restored: the long period of dislodgment from the land, the -diffusion of learning, the exercise of the franchise, and the training -in individual effort have left a seemingly unbridgeable chasm between -the past and the present forms. But though personal fidelity, in the -old sense, is improbable, group fidelity, founded upon the conscious -dependence of a class, is already observable, and it grows apace. Out -of the sense of class dependence arises the extreme deference which we -yield, the rapt homage which we pay--not as individuals, but as units -of a class--to the men of wealth. We do not know them personally, and -we have no sense of personal attachment. But in most things we grant -them priority. We send them or their legates to the Senate to make our -laws; we permit them to name our administrators and our judiciary; we -listen with eager attention to their utterances, and we abide by their -judgment. When the venerable Mr. Hewitt, brought forth like the holy -man Onias, in the Judean civil war between Aristobulus and Hyrcanus, to -denounce the opposing faction, utters his anathema against the minions -of Mr. Mitchell, we listen in awe and are convinced. A three-line -interview with the chief of the magnates is read with an eagerness -wholly wanting in our perusal of an official pronunciamento by the -most strenuous of Presidents. Our racial sense of humor, it must be -confessed, saves us from the more slavish forms of deference; we jest -about solemn themes and take in vain the names of great beings. Even -the name of the great magnate is more or less humorously played upon; -and our latest national pastime of “trust-busting” reveals a like -levity, though an innocent one. It shows, moreover, how far we have -reacted from our Puritan forefathers. For it is pursued not on account -of the pain it gives the trusts, but for the harmless pleasure it gives -both participants and spectators. But our subserviency, though less -formal than that of old, is withal more real and fundamental. - - -VI - -Current passivity has, however, a reverse side. To many persons a -recognition of the changing conditions brings demoralization or -despair. All are not won by the lure of “success.” To an increasing -number the dangling prize in the distance is but a mirage, and -oppressed by a sense of the bankruptcy of life they seek an oblivious -relief. There is a drift toward the twin dissipations of drink and -gambling, and there is an increase of suicide. The greater drink -consumption is a matter of common observation, and it is amply attested -by statistics. Mr. J. Holt Schooling’s figures in a recent issue of the -_Fortnightly Review_ show an increased consumption in the United States -of 20 per cent for the years 1896-1900, as against the years 1886-90. -The percentage of increase is slightly less than that of those -industrially exploited nations, Germany and France, but considerably -more than that of Great Britain and Ireland. The annual figures -published in the _World Almanac_ for 1902 give more pertinent lessons. -The unsettled and troublous year, 1893, witnessed an enormous increase -in drink consumption; but the succeeding hard times of 1894 and 1895, -when drink-money was increasingly hard to obtain, induced a greater -sobriety. With 1896 drinking became more general, or at least more -energetic; and except for a slight falling off in 1899, the consumption -of liquors and wines has risen steadily, reaching the enormous total -of 1,349,176,033 gallons in 1900. Much of this gain is confined to -beer, the cheapest of alcoholic beverages; but there has also been a -phenomenal increase in the consumption of spirits. From 71,051,877 -gallons consumed in 1896 there has been a steady annual rise to the -total of 97,248,382 gallons in 1900, a gain of 36.8 per cent. - -The recent increase of petty gambling is still more noticeable. Playing -for high stakes, a custom common enough in the late years of the -eighteenth century and the early years of the nineteenth, has long -been given over or transferred to the domain of “business.” But what -is colloquially known as “tin-horn” gambling has advanced, these last -five years, by leaps and bounds. Doubtless the high precedent of our -national Monte Carlos, the stock exchanges, is ample cause for much -of it; but other causes are also in operation. With those persons -that hearken to, but heed not, the seigniorial exhortation to bestir -themselves and conquer “success,” petty gambling is an expression of -unbelief. They know that the prizes advertised in the great industrial -game are not to be won; they see nothing ahead but a dull routine -of poorly remunerated labor, and they turn to gambling partly for -recreation and partly for profit. With those, on the other hand, who -not only hearken but heed, gambling is merely the application of their -ambitious plans to the branch of industry which promises, however -vainly, the most immediate returns. - -Faro, keno, and roulette may have suffered some decline in favor. If -so, statutes and the police, instead of a growing aversion to gambling, -must be held responsible. It is one of those conventional puzzles which -none can explain, that it is possible in our cities to restrict table -and wheel gambling, but seemingly impossible to restrict certain other -forms. Poker, for instance, maintains its hold, unawed by statute and -unhampered by authority; while policy and race-betting, the special -refuges of the desperately poor and the desperately fatuous, win new -and lasting converts day by day. Indeed, the growth of race-betting is -one of the striking phenomena of our time. It has become a habit, a -disease; and its confirmed victims are held in as slavish a thraldom -as are the victims of opium and hasheesh. One need not penetrate -to a pool-room or journey to a race-track to discover evidences of -its general diffusion. He may hear of it on every side, and he may -find definitive proof in the daily journals. In nearly all of these -the space given to the reports of races, the lists of betting odds -and accounts of great winnings, is generous; and in some three or -four of the metropolitan dailies the subject rises to the rank of a -specialty. The flaunting advertisements of the “tipsters” in one of -these newspapers rival in extent of space used and opulence of bargains -offered, the announcements of the dry-goods merchants. The glittering -lures dangled before the multitude by the seigniors seem trivial by -comparison. Uncertain, and at best remote, they prove no match for the -near-at-hand prizes to be won in gambling; and as a consequence tens -of thousands pin their hope of “success” in this world to a series of -fortunate winnings. - -The meaning of the increase of suicide is clouded by a number of -factors, and it is impossible to ascribe the tendency to one cause -alone. Were we to accept the explanation of the pulpit, we should see -in it the awful consequences of the decline of faith. Pathologists, -however, while not denying this influence, enumerate many others. -Racial and temperamental factors, drink and vice, are all concerned in -the matter, and even climates and seasons are influential. But whatever -the effect of these may be, the intensifying struggle for life these -last few years, and what appears to many minds a darkening outlook for -the future, must be acknowledged as powerful agents in increasing the -rate of self-destruction. The rate is highest in the great industrial -centres, where the struggle is fiercest, where the richest stakes are -won and lost, where luxury is most flaunting and poverty most galling; -and it is least where the struggle is in some measure relaxed. The -recent census shows for the decade an increased rate per 100,000 of -population from 8.8 to 9.9 in the States where registration of deaths -is required, from 11 to 12.7 in registration cities, and from 10.3 to -11.8 for the entire registration record. There are a few anomalies -in the figures which are difficult of explanation; the workaday -cities of Fall River and Allegheny have low rates of suicide, the -residence city of Los Angeles a high rate, while San Francisco reveals -the abnormal rate of 49 per 100,000. With all allowances, however, -the rule holds good: the more distinctly industrial and commercial -cities have remarkably high rates, the less distinctly industrial -and commercial cities remarkably low rates. In the first group are -Chicago, with a rate of 21.8; Milwaukee, 21; St. Louis, 19.1; Boston, -14.4; Cincinnati, 13.5; New York, 13.1; Philadelphia, 12.2; Baltimore, -12; Pittsburg, 9.3. In the second group may be instanced Atlanta, -with a rate of 6.6; Denver, 6; Albany, 3.2; Hartford, 1.3; Richmond, -1.2. These suicides are the unfit, say the complacent philosophers of -the day, and are quite as well off dead as alive; but they prove at -least that some slight qualification is needed to Professor Sumner’s -optimistic generalization that “an air of contentment and enthusiastic -cheerfulness ... characterizes our society.” The winners in the race -are doubtless enthusiastically cheerful, and the great mass that keeps -steadily on, fed by the delusion of ultimate “success,” are at least -cheerful without enthusiasm; but back of these are the losers and the -many who have seen the hollowness of the world’s promise, whose outlook -upon life is one of intensifying despair. - - -VII - -All of our general institutions reflect the changes in public thought, -taste, and feeling consequent upon the changing conditions of the -social régime. But on none of them are these changes writ more clearly -or in larger characters than on the institution of letters. Along with -the morganization of industry steadily proceeds the munseyization of -literature. We are a free people, our politicians tell us, and are -strenuously resolved to remain so. But if we are to be judged by our -popular literature, the verdict can hardly be other than that we have -reached an advanced stage of subserviency, and that the normal mood -of the overwhelming majority is one of complacence with its lot. Our -popular magazines regularly keep before us a justification, actual or -inferential, of things as they are; and though it is couched in less -argumentative phrasing than that of the newspapers, it is, no doubt, -for that very reason, a more plausible and effective expression of -the plea. There are panegyrics on our captains of industry, tales -of their exploits in the great industrial battle, descriptions of -their town-houses and country-seats,--all, in fact, that makes for -the emulation of their wisdom and virtues, and particularly of their -faculty of acquisitiveness,--with a multitude of recipes for the -winning of “success.” Along with this is provided a vaudeville of idle -entertainment: wonder tales, short stories, a gallery of pictures of -stage-folk, who, whatever their merits may be, bear but a problematic -relation to literature; and finally an amorphous compound of sedative -miscellany that not only charms the mind from serious thinking, but in -time paralyzes the very power of thought. - -Such of these publications as indulge in the gentle art of reviewing -give further evidence of changing conditions. Reviewing, as now -practised, studies the amenities of life, with a particular regard -for the counting office, “wherein doth sit the dread and fear” of -the publisher who has advertising to distribute. With a few notable -exceptions the reviewing journals make it their business to be “nice.” -They do not damn, not even with faint praise; they commend or extol. -It is not that they praise insincerely a bad book--reviewing is too -highly developed a craft for such crudity. But in a bad book all -that the widest exercise of charity can pronounce even passably good -comes in for praise; and what is weak or poor, or inclusive under -old John Dennis’s favorite term of “clotted nonsense,” is mercifully -omitted from mention. So it is when the advertising publisher is a -factor in the game. But a reviewing journal must uphold a reputation -for impartial judgment, and must thus mingle blame with praise. Its -opportunity comes when some inglorious Milton of Penobscot or Butte -prints his verses at home at his own expense. A copy drifts into the -reviewing office and effects a transformation. The angelic temper upon -which so many and such large drafts are made becomes exhausted, and -the humble poet is treated to the sort of thing which Gifford used to -deal out to the Della Cruscans and the ireful Dennis to the poetasters -of Queen Anne’s time. It was perhaps the last regret of the late J. -Gordon Coogler, of Columbia, S.C., that instead of printing his amiable -verses on his own press, he had not guaranteed the cost of their -production, and secured their publication by a metropolitan firm. - -The literary distinction of former days has taken wings. Whether or -not Wordsworth was right in his lament over the state of England in -1803 may be questioned; but a like lament uttered for our own land and -time would be in large part justified. We have the two extremes of -exceedingly plain living and of wildly extravagant living; but high -thinking seems to be the accompaniment of neither. For several years -the only really salable books have been novels, and among these popular -favor has centred almost wholly on the kind called historical--called -so not because the stories bear any relation to history, but because -in them the action is put in a past time. Lately, it is true, there -have been signs of a reaction; but let none imagine that it is due to a -growing taste for stronger meat. Rather it is an evidence that in our -love of novelty we have tired of one trifle and now demand another in -its stead. - -For the recent indications of declining favor for the historical novel -are accompanied by no signs of reviving favor for more serious works. -The Huxley Memoirs, it is true, unexpectedly achieved the degree of -favor usually given to a fifth-rate novel; but the work, despite its -science, philosophy, and religious controversy, was yet an entertaining -story, and won its way for that reason. No more in fiction than in -other branches of literature is there promise of better things. Even -the “problem” novel, which, though often crude or hysterical, was yet -an attempt to deal with some of the deeper facts of life, has been -banished, and is not to be permitted to return. “Our publishers,” says -the well-known literary supplement of a New York daily newspaper, “are -seeking on all sides for wholesome stories, dealing optimistically -with life, and reaching happy conclusions.” It is a true judgment, and -reveals most clearly the present standards of public taste. - -Our popular magazines most accurately reflect the public mind. -Pictures and stories are the substance of its childish delight. Among -periodicals we have nothing in any way comparable to the _Edinburgh_, -the _Quarterly_, the _Nineteenth Century_, the _Fortnightly_, the -_Contemporary_, the _Athenæum_, the _Spectator_, the _Saturday Review_, -or even the _Academy_. Whatever tendencies of late have seemed to -indicate the future planting of such reviews on these shores, have very -recently been extinguished. Of three publications in which articles of -some thought and some importance were occasionally printed, two have -recently found a monthly issue more frequent than the public taste -required, and have accordingly transformed themselves into quarterlies, -while the third has been forced to make concessions to the general -demand for “lightness and brightness.” For these are the qualities -which pay. “Make it light and bright,” is the order which the literary -contributor hears in the editorial offices when he submits his wares; -and though the terms may be variously interpreted, he understands -what is meant: he must write down to the level of childish minds and -complacent natures. Accordingly, he writes so, to the best of his -ability, and so, to that limit, do all his fellows. The collective -result is seen in the character of the greater number of our books, our -magazines, our Saturday and Sunday supplements. On all sides is poured -forth a flood of print which deludes the hope or flatters the vanity -of the mass, and which insures a state of mental subserviency,--the -necessary requisite of the economic subserviency imposed by the ruling -class. - - - - -CHAPTER IX TRANSITION AND FULFILMENT - - -Upon all the heterogeneous but coalescing units of the social mass -the group of magnates imposes its collective will. There are still -disputes and rivalries among the rulers, and may ever be; but these are -for the most part minor differences, to be settled among themselves -and their mutual arbitrators, the judges, and qualify in no way -the facts of a recognized community of interests and of collective -purposes and plans. Whatever the individual rivalries, they result in -no deliberate betrayal of class interest; practically every magnate -maintains, at all hazards, his fidelity to the group. A sense of group -honor may in most instances prompt this fidelity, but a lively sense -of apprehension is also influential. For should any magnate become -possessed of heretical notions, and thereupon make common cause with -the public against a particular interest of his class, he would by that -act banish himself from communion with his fellows, and jeopard his -possessions to the last dime. There is, as every one knows, a definite -seigniorial resolve that no strike of workmen on transportation lines -or in public utilities shall succeed; and when such a strike occurs, -every resource of the magnate class is brought to bear to resist and -defeat it. Often there are attendant circumstances which might tempt a -rival, for his own interests, to interfere on behalf of the workers. -But the thing is never done; and he who should do it would declass -himself as effectually as a mediæval nobleman would have done by -enlisting in a peasants’ rebellion. There is, furthermore, a definite -seigniorial determination to withstand to the utmost the agitation -for public ownership; every magnate, with his intellectual retainers -behind him, makes of himself a modern Stonewall Jackson in resistance -to this movement. Here, again, industrial rivalry might at times prompt -a desertion to the public cause. But there is no such case; here, as -elsewhere, the ruling class maintains its integrity. As is known, -great strikes are sometimes won; and occasionally, in isolated places, -an advance is made in the direction of public ownership. But neither -is accomplished through desertions in the seigniorial group, and the -instances prove only that its rule has not yet become supreme. - - -I - -The new Feudalism will be but an orderly outgrowth of present -tendencies and conditions. All societies evolve naturally out of their -predecessors. In sociology, as in biology, there is no cell without a -parent cell. The society of each generation develops a multitude of -spontaneous and acquired variations, and out of these, by a blending -process of natural and conscious selection, the succeeding society -is evolved. The new order will differ in no important respects from -the present, except in the completer development of its more salient -features. The visitor from another planet who had known the old and -should see the new would note but few changes. _Alter et idem_--another -yet the same--he would say. From magnate to baron, from workman to -villein, from publicist to court agent and retainer, will be changes of -state and function so slight as to elude all but the keenest eyes. - -An increased power, a more concentrated control, will be seen. But -these have their limitations, which must not be disregarded. A sense -of the latent strength of democracy will restrain the full exercise -of baronial powers, and a growing sense of ethics will guide baronial -activities somewhat toward the channels of social betterment. For -democracy will endure, in spite of the new order. “Like death,” said -Disraeli, “it gives back nothing.” Something of its substance it -gives back, it must be confessed; but of its outer forms it yields -nothing, and thus it retains the potentiality of exerting its will -in whatever direction it may see fit. And this fact, though now but -feebly recognized, will be better understood as time runs on, and -the barons will bear in mind the limit of popular patience. It is an -elastic limit, of a truth; for the mass of mankind are more ready -to endure known ills than to fly to others that they know not. It -is a limit which, to be heeded, needs only to be carefully studied. -Macaulay’s famous dictum, that the privileged classes, when their -rule is threatened, always bring about their own ruin by making -further exactions, is likely, in this case, to prove untrue. A -wiser forethought begins to prevail among the autocrats of to-day--a -forethought destined to grow and expand and to prove of inestimable -value when bequeathed to their successors. Our nobility will thus -temper their exactions to an endurable limit; and they will distribute -benefits to a degree that makes a tolerant, if not a satisfied, people. -They may even make a working principle of Bentham’s maxim, and after, -of course, appropriating the first and choicest fruits of industry to -themselves, may seek to promote the “greatest happiness of the greatest -number.” For therein will lie their greater security. - -The Positivists, in their prediction of social changes, give us the -phrase, “the moralization of capital,” and some of the more hopeful -theologians, not to be outdone, have prophesied “the Christianization -of capital.” So far there is not much to be said confirmatory of either -expectation. Yet it is not to be denied that the faint stirrings of -an ethical sense are observable among the men of millions, and that -the principle of the “trusteeship of great wealth” has won a number -of adherents. The enormous benefactions for social purposes, the -construction of “model workshops” and “model villages,” though in many -cases prompted by self-interest and in others by a love of ostentation, -are at least sometimes due to a new sense of social responsibility. A -duty to society has been apprehended, and these are its first fruits. -It is a duty, true enough, which is but dimly seen and imperfectly -fulfilled. The greater part of these benefactions, as has already -been pointed out, is directed to purposes which have but a slight or -indirect bearing upon the relief of social distress, the restraint of -injustice, or the mitigation of remediable hardships. The giving is -even often economically false, and if carried to an extreme would prove -disastrous to the community; for in many cases it is a transmutation -of wealth from a status of active capital, wherein it makes possible -a greater diffusion of comfort, to a status of comparative sterility. -But, though often mistaken as is the conception and futile the -fulfilment of this duty, the fact that it is apprehended at all is -one of considerable importance, and one that carries the promise of -baronial security in the days to come. - - -II - -Bondage to the land was the basis of villeinage in the old régime; -bondage to the job will be the basis of villeinage in the new. The -new régime, absolving itself from all general responsibility to its -workers, extends a measure of protection, solely as an act of grace, -only to those who are faithful and obedient; and it holds the entire -mass of its employed underlings to the terms of day-by-day service. The -growth of industries has overshadowed the importance of agriculture, -which is ever being pushed back into the West and into other and -remote countries; and the new order finds its larger interests and its -greater measure of control in the workshops rather than on the farms. -The oil wells, the mines, the grain fields, the forests, and the great -thoroughfares of the land are its ultimate sources of revenue; but its -strongholds are in the cities. It is in these centres of activity, -with their warehouses, where the harvests are hoarded; their workshops, -where the metals and woods are fashioned into articles of use; their -great distributing houses; their exchanges; their enormously valuable -franchises to be had for the asking or the seizing, and their pressure -of population, which forces an hourly increase in the exorbitant value -of land, that the new Feudalism finds the field best adapted for its -main operations. - -Bondage to the job will be the basis of the new villeinage. The -wage-system will endure, for it is a simpler and more effective -means of determining the baron’s volume of profits than were the -“boon-works,” the “week-works,” and the _corvées_ of old. But with -increasing concentration on the one hand, and the fiercer competition -for employment on the other, the secured job will become the laborer’s -fortress, which he will hardly dare to evacuate. The hope of bettering -his condition by surrendering one place in the expectation of getting -another will be qualified by a restraining prudence. He will no -longer trust his individual strength, but when he protests against -ill conditions, or, in the last resort, strikes, it will be only in -company with a formidable host of his fellows. And even the collective -assertion of his demands will be restrained more and more as he -considers the constantly recurring failures of his efforts. Moreover, -concentration gives opportunity for an almost indefinite extension of -the black-list: a person of offensive activity may be denied work in -every feudal shop and on every feudal farm from one end of the country -to the other. He will be a hardy and reckless industrial villein indeed -who will dare incur the enmity of the Duke of the Oil Trust when he -knows that his actions will be promptly communicated to the banded -autocracy of dukes, earls, and marquises of the steel, coal, iron, -window glass, lumber, and traffic industries. - -There were three under-classes in the old Feudalism,--free tenants, -villeins, and cotters. The number of tenants on the farms has -approximately doubled in the last twenty years, while in the great -cities nearly the whole population are tenants. The cotters, with their -little huts and small holdings in isolated places about the margin -of cultivation, are also in process of restoration. The villeins are -an already existent class, more numerous proportionately than ever -before, though the exact status of their villeinage is yet to be fixed. -But modern society is characterized by complexities unknown in any -of its predecessors, and the specialization of functions requires a -greater number of subordinate classes. It is a difficult task properly -to differentiate them. They shade off almost imperceptibly into one -another; and the dynamic processes of modern industry often hurl, -in one mighty convulsion, great bodies of individuals from a higher -to a lower class, blurring or obscuring the lines of demarcation. -Nevertheless, to take a figure from geology, these convulsions become -less and less frequent as the substratum of industrial processes -becomes more fixed and regular; the classes become more stable and show -more distinct differences, and they will tend, under the new régime, -to the formal institution of graded caste. At the bottom are the -wastrels, at the top the barons; and the gradation, when the new régime -shall have become fully developed, whole and perfect in its parts, will -be about as follows:-- - -I. The barons, graded on the basis of possessions. - -II. The court agents and retainers. - -III. The workers in pure and applied science, artists and physicians. - -IV. The entrepreneurs, the managers of the great industries, -transformed into a salaried class. - -V. The foremen and superintendents. This class has heretofore been -recruited largely from the skilled workers, but with the growth of -technical education in schools and colleges, and the development of -fixed caste, it is likely to become entirely differentiated. - -VI. The villeins of the cities and towns, more or less regularly -employed, who do skilled work and are partially protected by -organization. - -VII. The villeins of the cities and towns who do unskilled work and -are unprotected by organization. They will comprise the laborers, -domestics, and clerks. - -VIII. The villeins of the manorial estates, of the great farms, the -mines, and the forests. - -IX. The small-unit farmers (land owning), the petty tradesmen, and -manufacturers. - -X. The subtenants on the manorial estates and great farms -(corresponding to the class of “free tenants” in the old Feudalism). - -XI. The cotters. - -XII. The tramps, the occasionally employed, the unemployed--the -wastrels of city and country. - -The principle of gradation is the only one that can properly be -applied. It is the relative degree of comfort--material, moral, -and intellectual--which each class directly contributes to the -nobility. The wastrels contribute least, and they are the lowest. The -under-classes who do the hard work lay the basis of all wealth, but -their contribution to the barons is indirect, and comes to its final -goal through intermediate hands. The foremen and superintendents -rightly hold a more elevated rank, and the entrepreneurs, who directly -contribute most of the purely material comfort, will be found well up -toward the top. Farther up in the social scale, partly from æsthetic -and partly from utilitarian considerations, will be the scientists and -artists. The new Feudalism, like most autocracies, will foster not only -the arts, but also certain kinds of learning--particularly the kinds -which are unlikely to disturb the minds of the multitude. A future -Marsh or Cope or Le Conte will be liberally patronized and left free -to discover what he will; and so, too, an Edison or a Marconi. Only -they must not meddle with anything relating to social science. For -obvious reasons, also, physicians will occupy a position of honor and -comparative freedom under the new régime. - -But higher yet is the rank of the court agents and retainers. This -class will include the editors of “respectable” and “safe” newspapers, -the pastors of “conservative” and “wealthy” churches, the professors -and teachers in endowed colleges and schools, lawyers generally, and -most judges and politicians. During the transition period there will -be a gradual elimination of the more unserviceable of these persons, -with the result that in the end this class will be largely transformed. -The individual security of place and livelihood of its members will -then depend on the harmony of their utterances and acts with the wishes -of the great nobles. Theirs, in a sense, will be the most important -function in the State--“to justify the ways of God [and the nobility] -to man.” They will be the safeguards of the realm, the assuagers of -popular suspicion and discontent. So long as they rightly fulfil their -functions, their recompense will be generous; but such of them as have -not the tact or fidelity to do or say what is expected of them will be -promptly forced into class XI or XII, or, in extreme cases, banished -from all classes, to become the wretched pariahs of society. At times -two divisions of this class will find life rather a burdensome travail. -They are the judges and the politicians. Holding their places at once -by popular election and by the grace of the barons, they will be fated -to a constant see-saw of conflicting obligations. They must, in some -measure, satisfy the demands of the multitude, and yet, on the other -hand, they must obey the commands from above. - - -III - -Through all the various activities of these classes (except the -wastrels and the cotters) our Benevolent Feudalism will carry on the -Nation’s work. The full measure of profit is its aim; and having the -substance of its desire, it shows a utilitarian scorn of the mummeries -and ceremonials by which the overlordship of other days was formally -acknowledged. The ancient ceremony of “homage,” the swearing of -personal fidelity to the lord, is relaxed into the mere beseeching -of the foreman for work. Directness and efficacy characterize its -methods. The wage-system, with its mechanical simplicity, continuing -in force, there is an absence of the old exactions of special work. -A mere altering of the wage-scale appropriates to the noble whatever -share of the product he feels he may safely demand for himself. -Thus “week-work,” the three or four days’ toil in each week which -the villein had to give unrecompensed to the lord, and “boon-work,” -the several days of extra toil three or four times a year, will -never be revived. Even the company store, the modern form of feudal -exaction, will in time be given up, for at best it is but a clumsy -and offensive makeshift, and defter and less irritating means are at -hand for reaching the same result. There will hardly be a restoration -of “relief,” the payment of a year’s dues on inheriting an allotment -of land, or of “heriot,” the payment of a valuable gift from the -possessions of a deceased relative. Indeed, these tithes may not be -worth the bother of collecting; for the villein’s inheritance will -probably be but moderate, as befits his state and the place which God -and the nobility have ordained for him. - -Practically all industry will be regulated in terms of wages, and the -entrepreneurs, who will then have become the chief salaried officers -of the nobles, will calculate to a hair the needful production for -each year. Waste and other losses will thus be reduced to a minimum. -A vast scheme of exact systematization will have taken the place of -the old competitive chaos, and industry will be carried on as by -clock-work. The workshops will be conducted practically as now. Only -they will be very much larger, the individual and total output will be -greater, the unit cost of production will be lessened. Wages and hours -will for a time continue on something like the present level; but, -despite the persistence of the unions, no considerable gains in behalf -of labor are to be expected, except such as are freely given as acts -of baronial grace and benevolence. The owners of all industry worth -owning, the barons will laugh at threats of striking and boycotting. -No competitor will be permitted to make capital out of the labor -disputes of another. There may or may not be competitors. A gigantic -merger of all interests, governed by a council of ten, may supplant the -individual dukedoms and baronies in the different industries, or these -may continue as now, the sovereign units of a federated whole. But in -neither case can labor carry its point against them. Nevertheless, -dissatisfaction must be guarded against as a possible menace to the -régime. Wages and dividends will be nicely balanced with a watchful -regard for the fostering of content; workshops and villages of yet -more approved models than any of the present will be built, and a -thousand Pelzers and Pullmans will arise. Old-age pensions, or at -least the promise of them, will be extended to new groups, and by all -possible means the lesson that protection and security are due only to -faithfulness and obedience will be made plain to the entire villein -class. - -Gradually a change will take place in the aspirations and conduct of -the younger generations. Heretofore there has been at least some -degree of freedom of choice in determining one’s occupation, however -much that freedom has been curtailed by actual economic conditions. -But with the settling of industrial processes comes more and more -constraint. The dream of the children of the farms to escape from their -drudgery by migrating to the city, and from the stepping-stone of a -clerkly place at three dollars a week to rise to affluence, will be -given over, and they will follow the footsteps of their fathers. A like -fixity of condition will be observed in the cities, and the sons of -clerks and of mechanics and of day laborers will tend to accept their -environment of birth and training and abide by it. It is a phenomenon -observable in all countries where the economic pressure is severe, and -it is yet more certain to obtain in feudal America. - - -IV - -The outlines of the present State loom but feebly through the intricate -network of the new system. The nobles will have attained to complete -power, and the motive and operation of government will have become -simply the registering and administering of their collective will. -And yet the State will continue very much as now, just as the form -and name of the Roman Republic continued under Augustus. The present -State machinery is admirably adapted for the subtle and extra-legal -exertion of power by an autocracy; and while improvements to that end -might unquestionably be made, the barons will hesitate to take action -which will needlessly arouse popular suspicions. From petty constable -to Supreme Court Justice the officials will understand, or be made -to understand, the golden mean of their duties; and except for an -occasional rascally Jacobin, whom it may for a time be difficult to -suppress, they will be faithful and obey. - -The manorial courts, with powers exercised by the local lords, -will not, as a rule, be restored. Probably the “court baron,” for -determining tenantry and wage-questions, will be revived. It may even -come as a natural outgrowth of the present conciliation boards, with -a successor of the Committee of Thirty-six of the National Civic -Federation as a sort of general court baron for the nation. But the -“court leet,” the manorial institution for punishing misdemeanors, -wherein the baron holds his powers by special grant from the central -authority of the State, we shall never know again. It is far simpler -and will be less disturbing to the popular mind to leave in existence -the present courts so long as the baron can dictate the general policy -of justice. - -Armed force will, of course, be employed to overawe the discontented -and to quiet unnecessary turbulence. Unlike the armed forces of the old -Feudalism, the nominal control will be that of the State; the soldiery -will be regular, and not irregular. Not again will the barons risk the -general indignation arising from the employment of Pinkertons and other -private armies. The worker has unmistakably shown his preference, when -he is to be subdued, for the militia and the Federal army. It is not an -unreasonable attitude, and it is hardly to be doubted that it will be -respected. The militia of our Benevolent Feudalism will be recruited, -as now, mostly from the clerkly class; and it will be officered largely -by the sons and nephews of the barons. But its actions will be tempered -by a saner policy. Governed by those who have most to fear from popular -exasperation, it will show a finer restraint. - - -V - -Peace will be the main desideratum, and its cultivation will be the -most honored science of the age. A happy blending of generosity and -firmness will characterize all dealings with open discontent; but -the prevention of discontent will be the prior study, to which the -intellect and the energies of the nobles and their legates will be -ever bent. To that end the teachings of the schools and colleges, the -sermons, the editorials, the stump orations, and even the plays at the -theatres will be skilfully moulded; and the questioning heart of the -poor, which perpetually seeks some answer to the painful riddle of the -earth, will meet with a multitude of mollifying responses. These will -be: from the churches, that discontent is the fruit of atheism, and -that religion alone is a solace for earthly woe; from the colleges, -that discontent is ignorant and irrational, since conditions have -certainly bettered in the last one hundred years; from the newspapers, -that discontent is anarchy; and from the stump orators that it is -unpatriotic, since this nation is the greatest and most glorious that -ever the sun shone upon. As of old, these reasons will for the time -suffice; and against the possibility of recurrent questionings new -apologetics will be skilfully formulated, to be put forth as occasion -requires. - -Crises will come, as in the life of all nations and societies; but -these will be happily surmounted, and the régime will continue, the -stronger for its trial. A crisis of some moment will follow upon -the large displacements of labor soon to result from the shutting -up of needless factories and the concentration of production in the -larger workshops. Discontent will spread, and it will be fomented, -to some extent, by agitation. But the agitation will be guarded in -expression and action, and it will be relatively barren of result. For -most ills there is somewhere a remedy, if only it can be discovered -and made known. The disease of sedition is one whose every symptom -and indication will be known by rote to our social pathologists of -to-morrow, and the possible dangers of an epidemic will, in all cases, -be provided against. In such a crisis as that following upon the -displacement of labor a host of economists, preachers, and editors will -be ready to show indisputably that the evolution taking place is for -the best interests of all; that it follows a “natural and inevitable -law”; that those who have been thrown out of work have only their own -incompetency to blame; that all who really want work can get it, and -that any interference with the prevailing régime will be sure to bring -on a panic, which will only make matters worse. Hearing this, the -multitude will hesitatingly acquiesce and thereupon subside; and though -occasionally a radical journal or a radical agitator will counsel -revolt, the mass will remain quiescent. Gradually, too, by one method -or another, sometimes by the direct action of the nobility, the greater -part of the displaced workers will find some means of getting bread, -while those who cannot will be eliminated from the struggle and cease -to be a potential factor for trouble. Crises of other kinds and from -other causes will arise, only to be checkmated and overcome. What the -barons will most dread will be the collective assertion of the villeins -at the polls; but this, too, from experience, they will know to be -something which, while dangerous, may yet be thwarted. By the putting -forward of a hundred irrelevant issues they can hopelessly divide -the voters at each election; or, that failing, there is always to be -trusted as a last resort the cry of impending panic. - - -VI - -Gradually the various processes in the social life merge, like the -confluents of some mighty Amazon, into a definite and confined stream -of tendency. A more perfect, a better coördinated unity develops in -the baronial class, and the measure of its control is heightened and -extended to a golden mean which insures supremacy with peace. The -under-classes settle in their appointed grooves, and the professional -intermediaries definitely and openly assume their dual function of -advisers to the barons and of interpreters to the people of the -baronial will and ways. Laws, customs, the arts,--all the institutions -and social forces,--change with the industrial transformation, and -attain a finer harmony with the actual facts of life. All except -literature, be it said, for this has outdistanced its fellows in the -great current and already reflects the conditions, the moods, and -ideals of the society of to-morrow. Here, at least, the force of nature -can no farther go, and no change is to be anticipated for the present. -But the other institutions and social forces are gradually transformed, -and when the full coalescence of all the factors is attained, our -Benevolent Feudalism, without a shock, without so much variance as will -enable any man to say, “It is here,” passes to its ascendency, and the -millennium of peace and order begins. - -Peace and stability it will maintain at all hazards; and the mass, -remembering the chaos, the turmoil, the insecurity of the past, -will bless its reign. Peace and stability will be its arguments of -defence against all criticism, domestic or foreign. An observant -visitor from some foreign State may pick a defect here and there; -but the eloquent defender of the régime will answer: Look upon the -tranquillity that everywhere prevails, and reflect upon the inquietude -and anarchy of the past. The disturbances of labor have ceased, and -sedition, though occasionally encountered, is easily thwarted and put -down. The crudities and barbarities of other days have given way to -ordered regularities. Efficiency--the faculty of getting things--is -at last rewarded as it should be, for the efficient have inherited -the earth and its fulness. The lowly, “whose happiness is greater -and whose welfare is more thoroughly conserved when governed than -when governing,” as a twentieth-century philosopher said of them, -are settled and happy in the state which reason and experience teach -is their God-appointed lot. They are comfortable, too; and if the -patriarchal ideal of a vine and fig tree for each is not yet attained, -at least each has his rented patch in the country or his rented cell -in a city building. Bread and the circus are freely given to the -deserving, and as for the undeserving, they are merely reaping the -rightful rewards of their contumacy and pride. Order reigns, each has -his justly appointed share, and the State rests in security, “lapt in -universal law.” - - - - -INDEX - - - A - - Abbott, Rev. Dr. Lyman, quoted, 150. - - Absolutism, of heads of combinations, 24; - “enlightened,” 60. - - Abstinence, seigniorial, 44. - - Accidents, to railroad workers, 65, 100-101; - to workmen generally, 94; - laws regarding, 93-96. - - Adams, Professor Henry C., 49; - quoted, 50. - - Addams, Jane, 79. - - Agriculture, 9, 19, 21, 47-57, 184. - - Alger, George W., quoted, 89, 110. - - Anacharsis the Scythian, quoted, 38. - - Anarchist-Communism, 4. - - “Anticipations,” 1, 3. - - Arbitration, legislation in behalf of, 97-98, 151. - - Aristotle, quoted, 136. - - Arnold, Matthew, quoted, 152. - - Ashby-Macfadyen, Irene, 79; - quoted, 81. - - Automobiles, 37, 38, 39. - - - B - - Bacon, Francis, quoted, 117. - - Baer, George F., quoted, 27, 81. - - Baldwin, Judge Simeon A., 127; - quoted, 128. - - Barons, _see_ Magnates. - - Benefactions, of the magnates, 9-10, 39, 45-46, 59-66, 80, 149, 151. - - Benevolence, of the magnates, 9, 39, 40, 45, 46, 60, 64, 160-161, - 183, 191, 196. - - Blacklisting, 89, 185-186. - - Blue, Leonard A., quoted, 84-85. - - Brewer, Justice David J., quoted, 120, 131-132. - - Bryan, Hon. W. J., 5. - - “Business,” main cult of magnates, 28; - cultural effect of, 28; - honesty of, 30; - sacred privileges of, 92, 98. - - - C - - Capital, independent, persistence of, 19, 20; - transformation of, 20. - - Carnegie, Andrew, quoted, 28, 29, 32. - - Census, bulletin on industrial combinations, 11; - on agriculture, 51; - on wages, 68-79; - on printing and publishing, 141-143. - - Chapman, John Jay, 84. - - Child labor, 76-82; - abuses of, 79-81. - - Clark, Professor John B., 3, 6; - quoted, 136. - - Coke, Sir Edward, quoted, 112. - - Colorado Fuel and Iron Co., 60-61. - - Combinations, industrial, 11, 12; - recent growth of, 13, 14; - commercial, mining, and transportation, 14; - unification of, 15; - absolutism of heads of, 24. - - Commissions, state, 84-85. - - Competition, decline of, 5. - - Conspicuous consumption, 40-41. - - Contract-labor law, violations of, 35. - - Court agents, 186, 187-188. - - Courts, 86, 93, 96, 97, 99, 102-121. - - “Courts baron,” 98, 193. - - - D - - Davies, Professor Henry, quoted, 7. - - Democracy, persistence of, 182-183. - - Discontent, 66, 125-129, 191, 194. - - Disraeli, Benjamin, quoted, 182. - - Dodd, S. C. T., quoted, 29, 34. - - Draper, William R., 49, 55. - - Drink consumption, 170-171. - - - E - - Edwards, Professor George Clinton, quoted, 79. - - Emery, Judge Lucilius A., quoted, 108. - - Employers’ duties (legal), 90-91, 104. - - Employers’ liability, 26, 83, 87, 99-100, 103-112. - - Endowments, _see_ Benefactions. - - Engels, Friedrich, 2. - - Entrepreneurs, 187, 190. - - - F - - Farmers, _see_ Agriculture. - - Fellow-servants, 108-109. - - Fessenden, Stephen D., quoted, 90, 91, 96, 108-109. - - Feudalism, 9, 10, 26, 66, 74, 88, 98, 181-199. - - Fisher, Brooke, 141. - - Flint, Charles R., 29; - quoted, 30. - - Fowler, Thomas P., 31. - - Frick, H. C., 33. - - - G - - Gambling, increase of, 170, 171-172. - - George, Henry, 5. - - Godkin, E. L., quoted, 126-127, 130. - - Gould, George, 33. - - - H - - Hadley, Dr. Arthur Twining, quoted, 129, 131. - - Hall, Dr. Stanley, 7. - - Hanna, Hon. Marcus A., 29. - - Harriman, E. H., quoted, 35. - - Hewitt, Hon. Abram S., quoted, 32, 169. - - Hill, James J., 28. - - Hillis, Rev. Dr. Newell Dwight, 151. - - Honesty, in “business,” 30, 158. - - Huntington, Rev. Dr. W. R., 151. - - - I - - Immigration, of farmers into Canada, 49-50. - - Income Tax, 162. - - Industrial Commission, 95. - - Industries, petty, numerical growth of, 18; - limitation of, 22; - subordination of, 23. - - Injunctions, against automobilists, 38; - against workmen, 103, 118-121. - - Interstate Commerce Commission, quoted, 34, 87, 101. - - Ireland, Archbishop John, quoted, 139. - - - J - - Jackson, Judge John J., 31; - quoted, 118, 120. - - Jones, Hon. Samuel M., 164. - - Judiciary, 25, 83, 92, 99, 102-121. - - - K - - Keller, Judge B. F., quoted, 118. - - Kelly, Edmond, 2. - - Kershaw, John B. C., quoted, 161. - - Kidd, Benjamin, 2, 3. - - Kropotkin, Peter, 2, 4, 5. - - - L - - Labor, seigniorial praise of, 30; - in factories, 66-82; - of children, 76-82; - attitude of lawmakers toward, 85-89; - attitude of judges toward, 103 _et seq._; - under new feudalism, 184-186, 190, 191-192. - - Lacey, B. R., 80. - - Lawmakers, 25, 83-101. - - Legislation, “labor” and social, 85-89, 112, 130-133. - - Literature, present state of, 175-179. - - Lloyd, Henry D., 2, 3; - quoted, 28. - - Low, Seth, 36; - quoted, 37. - - - M - - MacArthur, Rev. Dr. R. S., quoted, 152. - - McLennan, Judge Peter B., 105. - - Magnates, 8, 9, 16, 23, 24, 26; - self-consciousness of the, 27; - cult of “business” of the, 28; - invasion of literature by the, 28-29; - praise of labor by the, 30; - attitude toward trade-unions of, 30; - attitude toward government of the, 32-39; - benefactions of the, 9-10, 39, 45-46, 59-66, 80, 149, 151; - ostentation of the, 39-44, 183; - “liberality” to employees of the, 59-66; - control of legislation by the, 83-89, 99-101; - influence upon judiciary of the, 121, 133, 135; - praise of the, 137; - influence upon the press of the, 143-148; - influence upon the pulpit of the, 148-153; - general influence upon society of the, 154-170; - influence upon literature of the, 175-179; - class consciousness of the, 180-181; - increased power of the, 182-183, 185, 187, 191, 192-193, 196-198. - - Magruder, Justice B. D., quoted, 114-115. - - Mallock, W. H., quoted, 134. - - Manufactures, census of, 68-79. - - Marx, Karl, 2; - quoted, 102. - - Matson, Clarence H., 49. - - Militia, under new feudalism, 193. - - Mitchell, John, 31. - - Model workshops and villages, 60-61. - - Morganization of industry, 25, 175. - - Mosso, Professor Angelo, quoted, 123. - - Munseyization of literature, 175. - - - N - - Neo-Jeffersonians, 5, 6. - - Newspapers, 25, 139-148, 188. - - - O - - O’Brien, Judge Denis, 116. - - Old-age pensions, 61-66, 191. - - Ostentation, of the magnates, 39-44, 183. - - - P - - Pastors, of churches, 148-153, 188. - - Patton, Professor Francis L., quoted, 15. - - Peck, Professor Harry Thurston, quoted, 128-129, 134-135, 137. - - Pensions, old-age, 61-66, 191. - - Potter, Bishop Henry C., quoted, 16, 151. - - Production, small-shop, 17. - - - R - - Railroads, combinations of, 14; - resistance to law and justice by, 34, 111-112; - commissions for control of, 35; - accidents upon, 65, 100-101. - - Relief organizations, 61, 62, 93. - - Retailers, small, decline of, 22-23. - - Richmond, Benjamin A., “The New Feudalism,” 58. - - Rockefeller, John D., Jr., quoted, 29. - - Roosevelt, Theodore, quoted, 127. - - Ross, Edward A., 154; - quoted, 156, 159. - - Russell, George W. E., quoted, 41. - - Russell, Hon. W. E., quoted, 85. - - - S - - Sage, Russell, quoted, 29, 163, 165. - - Sanborn, Judge Walter H., 104. - - Savage, Rev. Dr. Minot J., 151. - - Schooling, J. Holt, 170. - - Seigniorial mind, renascence of, 27; - instances of, 28, 29, 30, 32, 37, 39, 45, 180-181. - - Shareholders, increase of, 17, 18, 160-163; - subordination of, 23, 24, 163. - - Shearman (Thomas G.) and Redfield (Amasa A.), quoted, 111. - - Single-Taxers, 5, 6, 7. - - Socialism, 5, 6, 7. - - Socialists, 2, 164, 167. - - Social Reform Club, pamphlet of, quoted, 118-120. - - Spencer, Herbert, 88. - - Steel combination, magnitude of, 13, 16, 31, 66. - - Stimson, F. J., 86, 112; - quoted, 132. - - “Success,” 156-160. - - Suicide, increase of, 173-174. - - Sullivan, J. W., 79. - - Sumner, Professor William G., quoted, 122-123, 133, 135-136, 174. - - Swayne, Judge Charles, 117. - - - T - - Talbot, Bishop Ethelbert, quoted, 151. - - Tenantry, 9, 19; - increase of, 21, 50-55, 186. - - Thayer, Judge Amos M., 104. - - Tolstoi, Lyof N., 2, 3. - - Trusts, _see_ Combinations. - - - V - - Value of dollar, comparative, 73-74. - - Vandervelde, Emile, quoted, 22. - - Veblen, Thorstein, quoted, 40, 43. - - Villeinage, the new, 59, 184-185, 187. - - - W - - Wadlin, Horace G., quoted, 87-88. - - Wage-earners, 58, 66-82; - number in manufactures, 71; - child, 76-82; - women, 74-76. - - Wage-scale, adjustment of, 66; - comparisons of, 66-79. - - Wage-system, continuance of, 185, 190. - - Wallace, Judge William J., quoted, 106. - - Warman, Cy, 49. - - Webb, Sidney, 3. - - Wells, H. G., 1, 3. - - Whittelsey, Dr. Sarah S., 95. - - Willoughby, William F., 94. - - Wright, Colonel Carroll D., 66-67. - - Wyckoff, Professor Walter A., 133; - quoted, 168. - - - - - * * * * * - - - - -Transcriber’s note: - -Footnotes have been relabeled consecutively through the document, and -the one footnote not associated with a table has been moved to the end -of its chapter. - -Punctuation has been made consistent. - -Variations in spelling and hyphenation were retained as they appear in -the original publication, except that obvious typographical errors were -corrected. - - - -***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK OUR BENEVOLENT FEUDALISM*** - - -******* This file should be named 53052-0.txt or 53052-0.zip ******* - - -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: -http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/5/3/0/5/53052 - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - diff --git a/old/53052-0.zip b/old/53052-0.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index cca0759..0000000 --- a/old/53052-0.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/53052-h.zip b/old/53052-h.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 2e9d69a..0000000 --- a/old/53052-h.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/53052-h/53052-h.htm b/old/53052-h/53052-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index 39fdb00..0000000 --- a/old/53052-h/53052-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,7810 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" - "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> -<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> -<head> -<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" /> -<title>The Project Gutenberg eBook of Our Benevolent Feudalism, by William J. (William James) Ghent</title> - <link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" /> - <style type="text/css"> - -body { - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%; -} - - h1,h2,h3,h4 { - text-align: center; /* all headings centered */ - clear: both; -} - -p { - margin-top: .51em; - text-align: justify; - margin-bottom: .49em; -} - -/*Modified horizontal rules to fix ePub display issue*/ -hr { - width: 33%; - margin-top: 2em; - margin-bottom: 2em; - margin-left: 33.5%; - margin-right: 33.5%; - clear: both; -} - -hr.tb {width: 45%; margin-left: 27.5%; margin-right: 27.5%;} -hr.chap {width: 65%; margin-left: 17.5%; margin-right: 17.5%;} -/*End modified horizontal rule CSS*/ - -/*Index list items*/ -ul.index { list-style-type: none; } -li.ifrst { margin-top: 1em; } -li.indx { margin-top: .5em; } -li.isub1 {text-indent: 1em;} - -table { - margin-left: auto; - margin-right: auto; -} - -/*Table of Contents format*/ -table.toc {max-width: 30em;} -td.tocchapter{text-align: right; vertical-align: top; padding-right: 0.6em;} -td.toctitle {text-align: left; vertical-align: top; text-indent: -1.3em; padding-left: 1.3em;} -td.tocpage {text-align: right; vertical-align: bottom; padding-left: 1em;} - -/*Table CSS*/ -table.per {max-width: 30em;} -td.pertitle{text-align: center; max-width: 13em; vertical-align: middle; padding-left: 1em; - padding-right: 1em; border-left:1px solid black; border-bottom:1px solid black; border-top: double black;} -td.pertitle1{text-align: center; max-width: 13em; vertical-align: middle; padding-left: 1em; - padding-right: 1em; border-bottom:1px solid black; border-top: double black} -td.pernumber{text-align: right; vertical-align: top; padding-right: 0.5em;} -td.perstate{text-align: left; vertical-align: top; padding-right: 1em;} -td.perpercent1{text-align: right; vertical-align: bottom; padding-left: 0em; padding-right: 1.4em; border-left:1px solid black;} -td.perpercent2{text-align: right; vertical-align: bottom; padding-left: 0em; padding-right: 0.5em; border-left:1px solid black;} - -.pagenum { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */ - /* visibility: hidden; */ - position: absolute; - left: 92%; - font-size: smaller; - text-align: right; -} /* page numbers */ - -/* fractions*/ -.fnum, .fden { font-size: .7em; } -.fnum { vertical-align: text-top } -.fden { vertical-align: text-bottom } - -.nowrap { - white-space:nowrap; -} -/* end fractions */ - -.center {text-align: center;} - -.smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} - -/* Images */ -.figcenter { - margin: auto; - text-align: center; -} - -/* Footnotes */ -.footnotes {border: dashed 1px;} - -.footnote {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em;} - -.footnote .label {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;} - -.fnanchor { - vertical-align: super; - font-size: .8em; - text-decoration: - none; -} - -/* Poetry */ -.poetry-container {text-align: center;} - -.poetry -{ - display: inline-block; - text-align: left; -} - -.poetry .stanza {margin: 1em auto;} - -.poetry .indentbase {text-indent: -3em; padding-left: 3em;} -.poetry .indentquotebase {text-indent: -3.5em; padding-left: 3em;} -.poetry .indentone{text-indent: 8em;} -/* End poetry*/ - -/* Transcriber's notes */ -.transnote {background-color: #E6E6FA; - color: black; - font-size:smaller; - padding:0.5em; - margin-bottom:5em; - font-family:sans-serif, serif; } - -/*CSS to set font sizes*/ -/*font sizes for non-header font changes*/ -.largefont{font-size: large} -.smallfont{font-size: small} -.xsmallfont{font-size: x-small} -.titlefont{font-size:x-large} - -/*CSS to force a page break in ePub*/ -div.chapter {page-break-before: always;} - -/*Half-title page CSS*/ -#half-title -{ - text-align: center; - font-size: x-large; -} - -@media screen -{ - #half-title{ - margin: 6em 0; - } -} - -@media print, handheld -{ - #half-title{ - page-break-before: always; - page-break-after: always; - margin: 0; - padding-top: 6em; - } -} -/*End half-title page CSS*/ - -/*CSS markup for handhelds -- put at end of CSS*/ -@media handheld -{ - img {max-width: 100%; height: auto;} /*Limit width to display*/ - - .poetry - { - display: block; - margin-left: 1.5em; - } -} -/*End CSS for handhelds*/ - - hr.full { width: 100%; - margin-top: 3em; - margin-bottom: 0em; - margin-left: auto; - margin-right: auto; - height: 4px; - border-width: 4px 0 0 0; /* remove all borders except the top one */ - border-style: solid; - border-color: #000000; - clear: both; } - </style> -</head> -<body> -<h1>The Project Gutenberg eBook, Our Benevolent Feudalism, by William J. -(William James) Ghent</h1> -<p>This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States -and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no -restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it -under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this -eBook or online at <a -href="http://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you are not -located in the United States, you'll have to check the laws of the -country where you are located before using this ebook.</p> -<p>Title: Our Benevolent Feudalism</p> -<p>Author: William J. (William James) Ghent</p> -<p>Release Date: September 15, 2016 [eBook #53052]</p> -<p>Language: English</p> -<p>Character set encoding: UTF-8</p> -<p>***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK OUR BENEVOLENT FEUDALISM***</p> -<p> </p> -<h4>E-text prepared by Craig Kirkwood<br /> - and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team<br /> - (<a href="http://www.pgdp.net">http://www.pgdp.net</a>)<br /> - from page images generously made available by<br /> - Internet Archive/American Libraries<br /> - (<a href="https://archive.org/details/americana">https://archive.org/details/americana</a>)</h4> -<p> </p> -<table border="0" style="background-color: #ccccff;margin: 0 auto;" cellpadding="10"> - <tr> - <td valign="top"> - Note: - </td> - <td> - Images of the original pages are available through - Internet Archive/American Libraries. See - <a href="https://archive.org/details/ourbenevolentfeu00ghenrich"> - https://archive.org/details/ourbenevolentfeu00ghenrich</a> - </td> - </tr> -</table> -<p> </p> -<hr class="full" /> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_i" id="Page_i">[i]</a></span></p> - -<p id="half-title">OUR BENEVOLENT FEUDALISM</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_ii" id="Page_ii">[ii]</a></span></p> - -<div class="figcenter" style="width: 180px;"> -<img src="images/logo.jpg" width="180" height="62" alt="Publisher logo" /> -</div> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"></div><!--Page break for ePub--> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_iii" id="Page_iii">[iii]</a></span></p> - - - - -<h1>OUR BENEVOLENT<br /> -FEUDALISM</h1> - -<p class="center" style="margin-top:3em">BY<br /> -<span class="largefont">W. J. GHENT</span></p> - -<p class="center" style="margin-top:4em"><span class="largefont">New York<br /> -THE MACMILLAN COMPANY</span><br /> -<span class="smallfont">LONDON: MACMILLAN & CO., <span class="smcap">Ltd.</span></span></p> -<p class="center" style="margin-top:0.5em">1902</p> - -<p class="center smallfont" style="margin-top:1em"><em>All rights reserved</em> -</p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<div class="chapter"></div><!--Page break for ePub--> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_iv" id="Page_iv">[iv]</a></span></p> - -<p class="center"><span class="smcap"><span class="smallfont">Copyright, 1902,</span><br /> -By THE MACMILLAN COMPANY.</span></p> - -<p class="center smallfont" style="margin-top:1em">Set up and electrotyped October, 1902.</p> - -<p class="center" style="margin-top:4em">Norwood Press<br /> -<span class="smallfont">J. S. Cushing & Co.—Berwick & Smith<br /> -Norwood Mass. U.S.A.</span> -</p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"></div><!--Page break for ePub--> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_v" id="Page_v">[v]</a></span></p> - - - - -<h2>PREFACE</h2> - - -<p>The germ of this book was contained in an article -published in the <cite>Independent</cite>, April 3, 1902. The -wide interest which that article awakened prompted -the elaboration and arrangement of its briefly considered -and somewhat disjointed parts into the present -form.</p> - -<p>The chapters on “Our Makers of Law” and “Our -Interpreters of Law” have been carefully read by a -member of the New York Bar who has made a special -study of the matters treated therein. Some of -the decisions cited in the latter chapter are admitted -to be those of subordinate courts in comparatively -unimportant States. The intention, however, was to -give a general view of judicial interpretation; and -for that reason it became necessary to cite decisions -of inferior as well as superior courts, and those from -semi-industrial as well as industrial States.</p> - -<p>As the book goes to press, the news is published -that the anthracite magnates have yielded and made -concessions to public sentiment. It is an act in -harmony with the wiser forethought of most of the -magnates of to-day, and it strengthens the general -seigniorial position immeasurably.</p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"></div><!--Page break for ePub--> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_vii" id="Page_vii">[vii]</a></span></p> - - - - -<h2>CONTENTS</h2> - - -<div class="center"> -<table class="toc" border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0" summary="Contents"> -<tr><td class="tocpage" colspan="3"><span class="xsmallfont">PAGE</span></td></tr> -<tr><td class="toctitle" colspan="2"><span class="smcap">Preface</span></td><td class="tocpage"><a href="#Page_v">v</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="toctitle" colspan="2"><span class="xsmallfont">CHAPTER</span></td></tr> -<tr><td class="tocchapter">I.</td><td class="toctitle"><span class="smcap">Utopias and Other Forecasts</span></td><td class="tocpage"><a href="#Page_1">1</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="tocchapter">II.</td><td class="toctitle"><span class="smcap">Combination and Coalescence</span></td><td class="tocpage"><a href="#Page_11">11</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="tocchapter">III.</td><td class="toctitle"><span class="smcap">Our Magnates</span></td><td class="tocpage"><a href="#Page_27">27</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="tocchapter">IV.</td><td class="toctitle"><span class="smcap">Our Farmers and Wage-earners</span></td><td class="tocpage"><a href="#Page_47">47</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="tocchapter">V.</td><td class="toctitle"><span class="smcap">Our Makers of Law</span></td><td class="tocpage"><a href="#Page_83">83</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="tocchapter">VI.</td><td class="toctitle"><span class="smcap">Our Interpreters of Law</span></td><td class="tocpage"><a href="#Page_102">102</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="tocchapter">VII.</td><td class="toctitle"><span class="smcap">Our Moulders of Opinion</span></td><td class="tocpage"><a href="#Page_122">122</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="tocchapter">VIII.</td><td class="toctitle"><span class="smcap">General Social Changes</span></td><td class="tocpage"><a href="#Page_154">154</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="tocchapter">IX.</td><td class="toctitle"><span class="smcap">Transition and Fulfilment</span></td><td class="tocpage"><a href="#Page_180">180</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="toctitle" colspan="2"><span class="smcap">Index</span></td><td class="tocpage"><a href="#Page_199">199</a></td></tr> -</table></div> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"></div><!--Page break for ePub--> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_1" id="Page_1">[1]</a></span></p> - - - - -<h2>CHAPTER I<br /> -<span class="titlefont smcap">Utopias and Other Forecasts</span></h2> - - -<p>“The old order changeth, yielding place to new.” -But what the new order shall be is a matter of some -diversity of opinion. Whoever, blessed with hope, -speculates upon the future of society, tends to imagine -it in the form of his social ideals. It matters -little what the current probabilities may be—the -strong influence of the ideal warps the judgment. -To Thomas More, though most tendencies of his -time made for absolutism, the future was republican -and communistic; and to Francis Bacon the present -held the promise of a new Atlantis, despite the -growing arrogance of the Crown and the submissiveness -of the people.</p> - -<p>The great diversity of social ideals produces a -like diversity of social forecasts. All the soothsayers -give different readings of the signs. Even those of -the same school, who build the future in the light -of the same dogmas, differ in regard to particulars -of form and structure. How many forecasts of one -sort or another have been given us, it is impossible -to say. Mr. H. G. Wells, in a footnote to his “Anticipations,” -complains of their scarcity. “Of quite -serious forecasts and inductions of things to come,” -he says, “the number is very small indeed; a suggestion<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_2" id="Page_2">[2]</a></span> -or so of Mr. Herbert Spencer’s, Mr. Kidd’s -‘Social Evolution,’ some hints from Mr. Archdall -Reid, some political forecasts, German for the most -part (Hartmann’s ‘Earth in the Twentieth Century,’ -<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">e.g.</i>), some incidental forecasts by Professor Langley -(<cite>Century Magazine</cite>, December, 1884, <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">e.g.</i>), and such -isolated computations as Professor Crookes’s wheat -warning and the various estimates of our coal supply, -make almost a complete bibliography.” But surely -the Utopians, from Plato to Edward Bellamy, have -given us “quite serious forecasts”; there is something -of serious prophecy in both Karl Marx and -Friedrich Engels, much more in Tolstoi and Peter -Kropotkin; and the “Fabian Essays” are charged -with it. Mr. Henry D. Lloyd’s “Wealth against -Commonwealth” closes with a brilliant and eloquent -picture of a regenerated society, and Mr. Edmond -Kelly’s “Individualism and Collectivism” is in large -part prophetic. All the social reformers who write -books or articles give us engaging pictures of things -as they are to be; and though the Philosophical -Anarchists deal rather more largely with polemics -than with prophecy, the Socialists are conspicuously -definite and serious in their forecasts. Even the -popular scientists—the astronomers, biologists, and -anthropologists—often run into prediction; and in -the pages of Richard A. Proctor, E. D. Cope, and -Grant Allen, and of such living men as M. Camille -Flammarion, Mr. Alfred Russell Wallace, and Professor -W. J. McGee, we have frequent depictions of -certain phases of the future.</p> - -<p>Doubtless, any reader can add to this list. Of a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3">[3]</a></span> -surety, we have had no lack of forecasts of one sort -or another; and now we have some new contributions,—Mr. -Wells’s “Anticipations,” Mr. Benjamin -Kidd’s “Principles of Western Civilization,” two -brief but sententious papers by Professor John B. -Clark, on “The Society of the Future” and “A -Modified Individualism” (published in the <cite>Independent</cite>), -a definite Socialist prediction by Mr. Henry -D. Lloyd, and a semi-Socialist one by Mr. Sidney -Webb.</p> - - -<h3>I</h3> - -<p>Mr. Wells, in his lecture before the Royal Institution -last January, put forth the thesis that, just as we -can picture the general aspects of the earth in mesozoic -times by a study of geology and paleontology, so -by a study of the present sociological drift can we -picture the society of a hundred years hence. He -thereupon gives us “Anticipations” as a result of -the more or less rigorous working out of this method. -There is much to be said for the method, and its -right employment might probably give us something -of great value. Unfortunately, Mr. Wells forgets his -thesis, and plunges into pure vaticination. He writes -with a spirited aggressiveness, and his pictures are -often vivid and impressive. But the greater part of -his revelation is of a state of things which seems -far removed from what would be produced by any -current tendencies, actual or latent.</p> - -<p>Mr. Kidd’s predictions lack somewhat in definiteness -of outline, and need not here concern us. Tolstoi,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_4" id="Page_4">[4]</a></span> -on the other hand, is specific. He dreams of a -return to a more primitive manner of production, and -a social change toward a status of Anarchist-Communism. -He scoffs at the enormous diversity of wants -made necessary by the growing intelligence and -refinement of the race, and urges mankind to live -more simply. “The town must be abandoned, the -people must be sent away from the factories and -into the country to work with their hands; the aim -of every man should be to satisfy all his wants himself.” -But the counsel falls upon heedless ears. -Urged to live more simply, the race, impelled by -natural and irresistible laws, yearly increases the sum -of its wants. Science, art, and industry constantly -pile up new commodities. Mankind finds that -through them it secures longer and healthier, if not -happier lives. It recognizes that by this increase of -wants more human beings are employed, and that -by a slight diminution thereof tens of thousands are -thrown into idleness. And finally it recognizes that -by a division of labor, in which natural aptitude in -particular directions is sought to be secured, the -greatest and most economical production follows. -Under Anarchist-Communism and the performance -of labor in the direction of each individual attempting -to create the things needful for himself, there -would be entailed upon us a productive waste vastly -greater than that heretofore compelled by capitalism, -diffusing a degree of want and consequent wretchedness -at present unknown. There is no present indication -that mankind will take this step.</p> - -<p>Something better is to be said for Peter Kropotkin’s<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_5" id="Page_5">[5]</a></span> -ideal of a communistic union of shop industry -and agriculture. In remote places, outside the current -of factory industrialism, there are still survivals -of this union, though the communistic feature is generally -wanting. Doubtless, under any form of society, -even a well-regulated State Socialism, this union -would to some extent persist. But if there are any -present tendencies toward its growth, they are but -feeble and isolated. Kropotkin’s recent book, “Fields, -Factories and Workshops,” which was intended to -sound the glad timbrel of rejoicing over the expansion -of this movement, turns out to be a rather pitiful -threnody on the decline and death of petty industries -throughout Europe. Moreover, it is one thing to -argue the persistence of this manner of production in -scattered places, and quite another to argue it the -dominant manner of production in a transformed -society of the future. Of the coming of such a -society the evidences are painfully scant.</p> - -<p>We have also the Single-Taxers, the followers of -the late Henry George, who are quite as fertile in -prophecy as in polemics. They dream of a millennium -through the imposition of a tax on the economic -value of land, and the abolition of all other taxes -and duties of whatsoever kind. Free competition is -their shibboleth; and it is no less the shibboleth of -the Neo-Jeffersonians, the followers of Mr. Bryan. -Except for the fact that these two schools are somewhat -Jacobinical, their general notions of the coming -society do not differ greatly from the notions -of the orthodox economists. All of these desire, or -think they desire, free competition. Arising out of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_6" id="Page_6">[6]</a></span> -an era of competition, Professor Clark sees a coming -order wherein the rich “will continually grow richer, -and the multi-millionnaires will approach the billion-dollar -standard; but the poor will be far from growing -poorer.... It may be that the wages of a day -will take him [the worker] to the mountains, and -those of a hundred days will carry him through a -European tour.”</p> - -<p>The dreadful spectre of monopoly, however, arises -to threaten these visions. Most of the orthodox -economists acknowledge a possible danger from it, -but the Single-Taxers and Jeffersonians are sure it is -a real and growing menace. Says Professor Clark, -“Between us and the régime of monopoly there -ranges itself a whole series of possible measures -stopping short of Socialism, and yet efficient enough -to preserve our free economic system.” It is a “free -economic system” which all these are bent on -having,—the economists determined on preserving -it, the others on establishing it; for the Single-Taxers, -with their <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">bête noir</i> of private ownership of land, -and the Jeffersonians, with their <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">bêtes noirs</i> of railroads -and trusts, deny that our economic system is at -present “free.” Doubtless they are both right; but -if there be one fact in the realm of political economy -fairly established, it is that the era of competition, -whether free or unfree, is dead, and the means -of its resurrection are unknown to political science. -With old men the dream of its revival is warrantable, -for it springs from that retrospective mood of age -which gilds past times, and that attendant mood which -recreates and projects them into some imagined<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_7" id="Page_7">[7]</a></span> -future; but with the younger generation visions of -free competition are but as children’s dreams of wild -forests and shaggy animals—the atavistic reminders -of experiences unknown to the individual, though -knit into the fibre of the race. The subject is one -far better suited to the domain of a psychologist -like Dr. Stanley Hall than to the scope of this -book.</p> - -<p>Finally, we have the Socialists, with their prophecy -of the early establishment of a coöperative commonwealth. -It is a noble picture, in its best expression -based upon the extreme of faith in the coming generations -of mankind, however its draughtsmen may -criticise the wisdom and justice of the present. There -is no doubt that now a ground-swell of Socialist conviction -moves like a tide “of waters unwithstood”; -everywhere one notes its influences. Even so conservative -a scholar as Professor Henry Davies, lecturer -on the history of philosophy in Yale University, can -write, “There is no doubt that the next form of political -activity to claim attention is the socialistic, as -it is the most popular and serious of any now before -the educated minds of this country.” Its propaganda -is carried on untiringly, and that its results are feared -is evident from the equal aggressiveness of a counter-propaganda -maintained by the ingenious defenders -of the present régime against the whole form and -spirit of Socialism. But though socialist conviction -spreads, the substance sought for seems as far away -as ever. It would seem, for the most part, to be but -a lukewarm conviction, much like that for which the -Laodiceans were so widely famed. Present tendencies<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_8" id="Page_8">[8]</a></span> -make for other forms of production, for a vastly different -social régime.</p> - - -<h3>II</h3> - -<p>The dominant tendencies will be clearly seen only -by those who for the time detach themselves from -their social ideals. What, then, in this republic of -the United States, may Socialist, Individualist, and -Conservative alike see, if only they will look with -unclouded vision? In brief, an irresistible movement—now -almost at its culmination—toward great combinations -in specific trades; next toward coalescence -of kindred industries, and thus toward the complete -integration of capital. Consequent upon these -changes, the group of captains and lieutenants of -industry attains a daily increasing power, social, industrial, -and political, and becomes the ranking order -in a vast series of gradations. The State becomes -stronger in its relation to the propertyless citizen, -weaker in its relation to the man of capital. A growing -subordination of classes, and a tremendous increase -in the numbers of the lower orders, follow. -Factory industry increases, and the petty industries, -while still supporting a great number of workers, are -in all respects relatively weaker than ever before; -they suffer a progressive limitation of scope and function -and a decrease of revenues. Defenceless labor—the -labor of women and children—increases both -absolutely and relatively. Men’s wages decline or -remain stationary, while the value of the product and -the cost of living advance by steady steps. Though<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9">[9]</a></span> -land is generally held in somewhat smaller allotments, -tenantry on the small holdings, and salaried management -on the large, gradually replace the old system -of independent farming; and the control of agriculture -oscillates between the combinations that determine -the prices of its products and the railroads that -determine the rate for transportation to the markets.</p> - -<p>In a word, they who desire to live—whether farmers, -workmen, middlemen, teachers, or ministers—must -make their peace with those who have the disposition -of the livings. The result is a renascent Feudalism, -which, though it differs in many forms from -that of the time of Edward I, is yet based upon the -same status of lord, agent, and underling. It is a -Feudalism somewhat graced by a sense of ethics and -somewhat restrained by a fear of democracy. The -new barons seek a public sanction through conspicuous -giving, and they avoid a too obvious exercise of -their power upon political institutions. Their beneficence, -however, though large, is but rarely prodigal. -It betokens, as in the case of the careful spouse of -John Gilpin, a frugal mind. They demand the full -terms nominated in the bond; they exact from the -traffic all it will bear. Out of the tremendous revenues -that flow to them some of them return a part in -benefactions to the public; and these benefactions, -whether or not primarily devoted to the easement of -conscience, are always shrewdly disposed with an eye -to the allayment of pain and the quieting of discontent. -They are given to hospitals; to colleges and -churches which teach reverence for the existing -régime, and to libraries, wherein the enforced leisure<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10">[10]</a></span> -of the unemployed may be whiled away in relative -contentment. They are never given, even by -accident, to any of the movements making for the -correction of what reformers term injustice. But -not to look too curiously into motives, our new Feudalism -is at least considerate. It is a paternal, a -Benevolent Feudalism.</p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"></div><!--Page break for ePub--> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11">[11]</a></span></p> - - - - -<h2>CHAPTER II<br /> -<span class="titlefont smcap">Combination and Coalescence</span></h2> - - -<h3>I</h3> - -<p>We have, first, the enormous growth of industrial, -commercial, and financial combinations. A crude -idea of the extent to which concentration in -manufactures had grown up to May 31, 1900, may -be gained from Census Bulletin No. 122. In this -report only those aggregations are considered which -consisted of “a number of formerly independent -mills which have been brought together into one -company under a charter obtained for that purpose.” -Several of the new security-holding stock companies -are included, but “many large establishments comprising -a number of mills which have grown up, not -by combination with other mills, but by erection of -new plants or the purchase of old ones,” are not considered, -nor are gas and electric lighting plants, or -pools, and “gentlemen’s agreements.”</p> - -<p>The list contains records of 183 corporations, with -2029 active and 174 idle plants, an average of 11 -active plants each. The actual capital invested in -these corporations, exclusive of that for 56 of the -idle plants, was $1,458,522,573, and the authorized -capitalization was $3,607,539,200. These combinations -employed 24,585 salaried officers and clerks,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12">[12]</a></span> -and an average of 399,192 wage-earners. The 1047 -officers received an average of $6,825.28 yearly and -the wage-earners, $487.32. There were 40 combinations -in iron and steel, with 447 plants; 28 in liquor -and beverages, with 219 plants; 21 in food and allied -products, with 273 plants; 15 in clay, glass, and stone -products, with 180 plants, and 14 in chemicals, with -248 plants. The gross value of the manufactured -product of these combinations, as given by the census, -was $1,661,295,364. Excluding hand trades, government -establishments, educational, eleemosynary, and -penal workshops, and shops with a product of less -than $500, this total represented 14 per cent of the -value of the manufactured product for the whole -country.</p> - -<p>The spring of 1900 was, however, but the mid-morning -of the combination movement. Only 63 of -these companies had been formed previous to 1897, -while more than 50 per cent of them were formed -during the eighteen months from January 1, 1899, -to June 30, 1900. Since then the movement has -swept forward like a great tide. The consolidations -of manufacturing companies for the first five months -of 1901 alone probably exceeded $2,000,000,000 in -capitalization. The great steel “trust” (to use the -popular term), an $88,000,000 tin-can trust, still other -trusts in tobacco machinery, carpets, coal and coke, -witch-hazel, glass lamps and electric glass fittings, -ship-building, cotton duck, agricultural implements, -and watches, had their birth during this period. -More recently came the steel-castings trust, subordinate -to the steel corporation, a recombination in<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13">[13]</a></span> -tobacco, and very lately a new ship-building combination, -a $120,000,000 harvester trust, and a cotton -compress trust. The capital invested in manufacturing -combinations is now probably two and one-half -times what it was in May, 1900; and it is a reasonable -guess that nearly one-third of the manufactured -product of the country, outside of the petty trades, -comes from the combinations.</p> - -<p>Of the magnitude of some of these concerns the -average mind can form but an inadequate idea. The -figures expressing it are comparable with those of -star distances, which must be transmuted into light-years -to make them conceivable. A New York newspaper -has recently made some computations on the -great steel trust, which help to bring home to us a -realization of its size and power. Its yearly net -profits are now double the amount of the total revenues -of the United States Government in the year -Lincoln was elected. Its wage-roll carries on an -average of the round year over 158,000 names—an -army of employees larger by 45,000 than serves the -National Government in every branch of its civil -service, classified and unclassified, except only fourth-class -postmasters. Its wage-payments for last year -aggregated nearly $113,000,000, more by $13,000,000 -than the huge annual city budget of Greater New -York. Its annual production of steel is 10,000,000 -tons, 67 per cent of the total production of the country; -and its freight payments for the year 1901 amounted -to more than $54,000,000.</p> - -<p>During the same period financial, commercial, mining, -and transportation trusts have also had their splendid<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14">[14]</a></span> -inning. We read of an accident-insurance trust -with a capitalization of $50,000,000, the great shipping -trust, the $120,000,000 jobbing hardware trust, the -Interurban Street Railway stock-holding combination, -the beef trust, a $50,000,000 lead merger, a recombination -in copper, and a universal oil trust. <cite>Moody’s -Manual of Corporation Securities</cite> for 1902 gives a -list of 82 industrial and mercantile consolidations -effected between January 1, 1899, and September 1, -1902, each of which is capitalized at $10,000,000 -or more, the whole aggregating a capitalization of -$4,318,005,646. Thirty-nine of these, with $1,232,947,790 -authorized capital, were formed during 1899; -7 with $186,110,400 capital, in 1900; 20 with $2,141,197,456 -capital in 1901, and 16 with $757,750,000 -capital during the first eight months of 1902. The -list is admittedly incomplete. “It embraces only the -so-called gigantic combinations which have been forming -in the past three and one-half years. A complete -list, without regard to date of formation, and including -both large and small,” says this authority, “would -probably aggregate 850 different-going combinations, -and would easily foot up over $9,000,000,000 of -capitalization. Including railroad consolidations, such -a list would make a total of over $15,000,000,000 outstanding -capitalization.” As for the railroads, the -formation of the Northern Securities Company, the -recent assimilation of the Louisville and Nashville, -and the “reorganization” of the Rock Island show the -same drift. Five men, according to a recent statement -of Interstate Commerce Commissioner J. A. Prouty, -control all the railroads of the country; and Mr. John<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15">[15]</a></span> -W. Gates, a financier who may be supposed to know -something on that head, has more recently declared, -according to a newspaper interview, that two men are -really in control. “I believe that the time is not far -distant,” declared Professor Francis L. Patton, former -head of Princeton University, in a recent address -before the Presbyterian Social Union of Chicago, -“when there will not be a thing that we eat, drink, -or wear that will not be made by a trust.” He might -have gone farther and fared as well; for the theatrical -trust determines what dramas we shall witness; -the pulp trust, the typefounders’ trust, the news trust, -and the school-book trust exert a most direct bearing -on what we read and what our reading costs us; and -finally the undertakers’ trust determines the style -and cost of our burial.</p> - - -<h3>II</h3> - -<p>The tendencies make not only for combination in -specific trades, but for unification—for complete -integration of all capital which is susceptible of -organization. Capitalistic atoms of low valency—to -use a term from chemistry,—such as those invested -in some of the hand trades, custom and -repairing and the like—may continue their course, -but those of a high valency are sooner or later -brought into association. From this fundamental -grouping comes integration, the concentration of the -material units which go to make up an aggregate. -The lesser gravitates to the larger. It needs no -modern Newton to proclaim that in finance, commerce,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16">[16]</a></span> -and industry, as in the physical world, all -bodies attract one another in direct proportion to their -mass. Distance provides a limitation, it is true, to -the action of this law in the physical world; but -less so in the economic world, for such is the perfection -of our means of communication that they -provide a more transmissible medium to capital than -is the pervading ether to light and gravitation.</p> - -<p>The separate trade trusts are not sufficient unto -themselves, but move steadily toward unification. -A glance at the directorates of the leading combinations -shows many names repeated through a long -list of varied industries. The combinations themselves -reach out and acquire new interests, often distinct -from their primary interests. In Pennsylvania -coal is mined and railroads are operated by practically -the same companies, and in Colorado and West Virginia -nearly as complete an identity is discovered. -The steel corporation owns coal lands, limestone -quarries, railroads, and docks; it is allied with the -great Atlantic shipping trust; it is related, not distantly, -to the Standard Oil Company; and the beginnings -of a public opinion trust are indicated, for -already its chief magnate has acquired several newspapers -and a prominent magazine. Bishop Potter’s -prediction, it would seem, is in fair way of fulfilment. -“We must fully realize,” he said to the Yale students -last April, “the danger that mind as well as matter -will be at some time in the future capitalized, and -that the real thinking and planning for the many will -be done by a mere handful.” Beet and cane sugar -are soon to be joined, we read; paper and lumber, if<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17">[17]</a></span> -not already wedded, are at least on excellent terms. -Oil and gas on the one hand, coal and iron on the -other, have a “common understanding,” and each of -them holds morganatic relations with one or more of -the railroads. All the great combinations recognize -a growing community of interest; they tend more -and more to a potential, if not an actual, coalescence; -and in the face of popular agitation, legislative aggressiveness, -or the formal demands of labor, they develop -a unity of purpose and method. Their support is -thrown, in general, to the same candidates for governors, -senators, judges, and tax assessors. In brief, -they tend to the formation of a state within a state, -and their individual members to the creation of an -industrial and political hierarchy.</p> - - -<h3>III</h3> - -<p>The counter-tendency toward the persistence of -small-unit farming and of small-shop production and -distribution must not be lost sight of, nor must the -great combinations be looked upon as necessarily a -proof of individual concentration of wealth. That -they generally so result is hardly to be disputed; but -primarily, they mean the massing together of separately -owned capitals, often small, for a particular -use. There is every reason to suppose that the -shareholders grow in numbers, and that they increase -their holdings. So that while the magnates tend to -become Midases, there is a concurrent tendency making -for diffused ownership. The small investor is to -be found in every stratum of society, and the number<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18">[18]</a></span> -of shareholders in some of the great combinations -reaches an astonishing figure. The “one touch of -nature” which in Shakespeare’s eyes made the whole -world kin was the love of novelty; in our day it is -the passion for investing in shares.</p> - -<p>Petty industries and small-unit farming persist, despite -the movement toward combination. The recent -census gives the number of manufacturing establishments -in the United States as 512,726, an increase of -44.3 per cent. This is a larger percentage of increase -than is shown for any other of the fifteen items in the -census summary of manufactures, except capital, -children’s wages, and miscellaneous expenses. Doubtless -many of these establishments belong to the -trusts; but with all allowances the numerical growth -is remarkable. The undeveloped sections show the -greatest increase, but even industrially settled States, -such as Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island, -reveal marked gains. Professor Ely has pointed out -several branches of industry in which small-shop production -is increasing. Some investigations which the -present writer made two years ago in two branches -confirm this tendency. It is pronounced in the notion -trades and in the manufacture of women’s ready-made -wear. In the latter the industry has been -revolutionized, the large houses being menaced with -disaster and some of them with extinction. In dry-goods -distribution the tendencies are confused and -puzzling. While the number of general jobbing -houses in New York City has decreased from thirty-five -to five in twenty-five years, the remaining ones -growing to enormous proportions, the number of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19">[19]</a></span> -smaller houses distributing special lines has either -maintained its own or has grown. In Baltimore and -St. Louis small jobbing houses persist in the face of -the larger houses. In the retail trades, even in New -York, despite the creation of a number of mammoth -general stores, the dullest observer will note the continuance -of thousands of small grocery, dry-goods, -and furniture stores, confectionery and butcher shops; -while custom and repairing work is still done in the -little tailoring and shoemaking shops that speak a -sort of defiance to the great emporiums. Through -convenience of location to the community of customers -about them—often, too, by the giving of -credit—many of these little shops and stores furnish -a social service that cannot be performed by the -larger stores, which are mostly to be found massed in -the central shopping district.</p> - -<p>Something of the same nature is to be found in -agriculture. Though the great estates are increasing -in size, so also is the number of small holdings increasing. -Nearly every State and Territory shows an increase -in the number of farms, while the majority -show a decrease in average acreage. The great -stock-grazing farms of the West and the unproductive -“gentlemen’s estates” of the East help to make the -census figures misleading. It is probable that in -every State real farming is done on a smaller average -acreage than ever before.</p> - -<p>Even independent capital in trading and manufactures -shows an unexpected persistence. An interesting -article in a recent issue of the New York -<cite>Journal of Commerce</cite> puts the capitalization of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20">[20]</a></span> -great trusts for the twelve years ending with 1901 at -$6,474,000,000, of which it marks off $2,000,000,000 -as “spurious common stock,” that is, stock not representing -real capital in any form. Not more than -$300,000,000 of new capital, it maintains, had been -thrown into the consolidations. This would leave -$4,474,000,000 as the sum of values already established -by previous investment. On the other hand, it -maintains that actual records show that in seventeen -months from the beginning of 1901, in the four States -of New York, New Jersey, Delaware, and Maine, -the aggregate capitalization of newly organized companies -with a capital of $1,000,000 and upwards is -$1,969,650,000; and it calculates that for the whole -country, including the large and small corporations, -“the national industrial capital (exclusive of that for -transportation appliances) must have increased approximately -$5,000,000,000 since the end of 1900.” -Several rather obvious demurrers might be made -to the conclusions reached, but they need not now -concern us. With all possible discounting, strong -proof is given of the aggressive persistence of independent -capital.</p> - - -<h3>IV</h3> - -<p>Such facts, however, do not carry on the surface -their real import. Independent capital persists as a -force, but the units that compose it melt like bubbles -in a stream. These companies are but the raw or -“partly manufactured” material out of which the -great combinations are made. Formation, growth, -and absorption into a trust are generally the three<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21">[21]</a></span> -terms in their life-history; or if, through ill environment -or spirited warfare waged against them, they -fail to get secure footing, they soon slip back into the -slough of disaster. The fate of independent tobacco -factories, sugar and oil refineries, railroads, independent -companies of one kind or another, is constantly -before us. If they are worth having, they are more -or less benevolently assimilated; and if they are not -worth having, they are permitted to struggle onward -to the almost inevitable collapse.</p> - -<p>Neither do small holdings in agriculture mean -economic independence. As the late census reveals, -they mean tenantry. The number of farms operated -by owners is decreasing; tenantry is becoming more -and more common, and so is salaried management of -great estates. Of the 5,739,657 farms of the nation, -tenants now operate 2,026,286. Owners operated -74.5 per cent of all farms in 1880, 71.6 per cent in -1890, 64.7 per cent in 1900. The tendency is general, -and applies to all sections. Since 1880 tenantry -has relatively increased in every State and Territory -(no comparative data are given for the Indian Territory) -except Arizona, Florida, and New Hampshire. -Since 1890 it has increased in Arizona. In twenty -years it has increased 49.4 per cent in Florida, -though the unloading of “orange groves” and other -tropical paradises on the too susceptible Northerner -has increased ownership by a slightly greater ratio; -while in New Hampshire, where 2857 farms have -been given up in the last twenty years, tenantry has -decreased by but five-tenths of 1 per cent since -1890, and but six-tenths of 1 per cent since 1880.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22">[22]</a></span></p> - -<p>So, too, with petty industries and the small retailers. -M. Emile Vandervelde, in his sterling work, -“Collectivism and Industrial Evolution,” has well -shown how “small trade is the special refuge of the -cripples of capitalism.” It is the particular refuge -“of all who prefer, in place of the hard labor of production, -the scanty gleaning of the middleman, or -who, no longer finding a sufficient revenue in industry -or farming, desire to add a string to their bow by -opening a little shop.” But it would be a mistake, -he continues, to suppose that these miniature establishments, -which the census officials characterize as -distinct enterprises, can be generally regarded as the -personal property of those who carry them on. “A -great number of them, and a number constantly increasing, -as capitalism develops, have only a phantom -of independence, and are really in the hands of a few -great money lenders, manufacturers, or merchants.”</p> - -<p>Though M. Vandervelde argues on the basis of -these phenomena as observed in Belgium, France, -Germany, and England, the same conclusions are -applicable in the United States. Our national census -figures are practically useless as illuminators on the -subject, and one must get his data from the observation -or investigation of himself or others. It is -generally known that small industries the product -of which is more or less ingenious or artistic manage -to survive; that those the product of which is common -or usual are sooner or later extinguished; and -that the petty retailers represent so many heterogeneous -elements that it is impossible to predicate anything -of them as a class. Of these latter there is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23">[23]</a></span> -a moderate number who, by furnishing a needful -social service, make profits; there is a large and -constantly changing number who, through ease of -credit, manage to obtain stock without capital, and -who almost invariably succumb; there is then a -larger number whose little shops are run by women -and children, the husbands and fathers working at -some trade or office job, and hopefully expending -their weekly earnings in the vain attempt to “build -up a business”; finally, there is a class, the numbers -and relative importance of which it is impossible to -estimate, whose businesses are owned, directly or -indirectly, by other men or by companies.</p> - - -<h3>V</h3> - -<p>Many of these so-called independent concerns -find it possible, and some of them find it fairly profitable, -to continue. But the more the large combinations -wax in power, the greater is the subordination -of the small concerns. An increasing constraint -characterizes all their efforts. They are more closely -confined to particular activities and to local territories, -their bounds being dictated and enforced -by the pressure of the combinations. The petty -tradesmen and producers are thus an economically -dependent class. Equally subordinate—and for the -most part subservient—are the owners of small and -moderate holdings in the trusts. The larger holdings—often -the single largest holding—determine what -shall be done. Generally, too, the petty investors -are acquiescent to the will of the Big Men. But<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24">[24]</a></span> -occasionally, as in the case of the transfer of the -Metropolitan Street Railway stock, they rebel, and it -becomes necessary to suppress them. At the meeting -which determined this action, the protesting -minority were emphatically ordered to “shut up”; -when they still objected, the presiding officer -declared, “We will vote first; you can discuss the -matter afterward,” and the vote was promptly -taken. The head of an American corporation, -moreover, is often an absolute ruler, who determines -not only the policy of the enterprise, but the personnel -of the board of directors. It was a naïve letter -which a well-known New York financier recently -wrote to his “board of directors” on the occasion -of his retirement from the presidency of a great -trust company in favor of a retiring Cabinet minister. -He had been looking about, he explained, for some -time for a competent successor. Now he had found -him and had chosen him. Of course the formal -action of the board would be a welcome detail; and, -equally a matter of course, it was promptly given. -One of the copper kings recently testified in a legal -action that he “didn’t want to call the board of -directors together to obtain authority to buy adjacent -properties.” He went ahead, did what he pleased, -and let the board discuss the matter afterward. If -there was ever so much as a question about it, it -was but a profitless interference.</p> - - -<h3>VI</h3> - -<p>The tendencies thus make, on the one hand, toward -the centralization of vast power in the hands of a few<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25">[25]</a></span> -men—the morganization of industry, as it were—and, -on the other, toward a vast increase in the number -of those who compose the economically dependent -classes. The latter number is already stupendous. -The laborers and mechanics were long ago brought -under the yoke through their divorcement from the -land and the application of steam to factory operation. -They are economically unfree except in so far as their -organizations make possible a collective bargaining for -wages and hours. The growth of commerce raised up -an enormous class of clerks and helpers, perhaps the -most dependent class in the community. The growth -and partial diffusion of wealth has in fifty years largely -altered the character of our domestic service and increased -the number of servants many fold. The professions, -too, have felt the change. Behind many of -our important newspapers are private commercial -interests which dictate their general policy, if not, as -is frequently the case, their particular attitude upon -every public question; while the race for endowments -made by the greater number of the churches and by -all colleges except a few State-supported ones, compels -a cautious regard on the part of synod and faculty -for the wishes, the views, and the prejudices of -men of wealth. To this growing deference of preacher, -teacher, and editor is added that of two yet more -important classes,—the makers and the interpreters of -law. The record of legislation and judicial interpretation -regarding slavery previous to the Civil War -has been paralleled, if not surpassed, in recent years -by the record of legislatures and courts in matters -relating to the lives and health of manual workers,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26">[26]</a></span> -especially in such matters as employers’ liability and -factory inspection. Thus, with a great addition to -the number of subordinate classes, with a tremendous -increase of their individual components, and with a -corresponding growth of power in the hands of a few -score magnates, there is needed little further to make -up a socio-economic status that contains all the essentials -of a renascent Feudalism.</p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"></div><!--Page break for ePub--> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27">[27]</a></span></p> - - - - -<h2>CHAPTER III<br /> -<span class="titlefont smcap">Our Magnates</span></h2> - - -<p>With the rise of the magnates to power comes -a growing self-consciousness of their authority and -responsibility. “I am a citizen of no mean state,” -is the reflection of each of them as he looks upon -the emergent order of which he is so large a part; -and thereupon it becomes his mission to live up to -his rank and function. Frequently his benefactions -increase, and always he takes on a more Jovian air, -and views with a more providential outlook the phenomena -passing before and about him. He is a part -not only, as Tennyson makes Ulysses say, of all -that he has met, but of the primary causes of things. -He is at once the loaf-giver to the needy, the regulator -of temporal affairs, the lord protector of church -and society; and he holds his title directly from the -Creator. “The rights and interests of the laboring -man,” wrote the chief of the anthracite coal magnates -last August, “will be protected and cared for, -not by the labor agitators, but by the Christian -men to whom God in His infinite wisdom has given -the control of the property interests of the country.” -Gradually there comes the renascent development of -the seigniorial mind.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28">[28]</a></span></p> - - -<h3>I</h3> - -<p>“Business” is the main thought, and the apotheosis -of “business” the main cult of the new magnates. -“Of gods, friends, learnings, of the uncomprehended -civilization which they overrun,” indignantly writes -Mr. Henry D. Lloyd, “they ask but one question: -How much? What is a good time to sell? -What is a good time to buy?... Their heathen -eyes see in the law and its consecrated officers -nothing but an intelligence office, and hired men to -help them burglarize the treasures accumulated for -a thousand years at the altars of liberty and justice, -that they may burn their marble for the lime of -commerce.”</p> - -<p>Though a forcible, it is an extreme view, for it -leaves out of consideration the high professions of -morality, the frequent appeal to Christian ideals, the -tender solicitude for honesty, integrity, law and -order, with which our new magnates gild their worship -of “business.” Such of them as have recently -invaded literature give edifying glimpses of the new -seigniorial attitude. The artistic career, writes Mr. -Andrew Carnegie in his entertaining volume, “The -Empire of Business,” is most narrowing, and produces -“petty jealousies, unbounded vanities, and -spitefulness”; the learned professions also produce -narrowness, albeit often a high specialization of -faculty and knowledge. But “business,” properly -pursued, broadens and develops the whole man. It is -a view echoed to greater or less extent by the other -literary magnates, particularly Mr. James J. Hill,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29">[29]</a></span> -Mr. Russell Sage, Mr. S. C. T. Dodd, Mr. John D. -Rockefeller, Jr., the Hon. Marcus A. Hanna, and -Mr. Charles R. Flint.</p> - -<p>A flattering unction that all lay to their souls is -the dictum that success in business is a matter of -honesty, intelligence, and energy. “There is no line -of business,” writes Mr. Carnegie, “in which success -is not attainable. It is a simple matter of honest -work, ability, and concentration.” “To rail against -the accumulation of wealth,” writes Mr. Sage, in the -<cite>Independent</cite>, “is to rail against the decrees of justice. -Intelligence, industry, honesty, and thrift produce -wealth.... So long as some men have more sense -and more self-control than others, just so long will -such men be wealthy, while others will be poor.” -Mr. Dodd, in his address to the students of Syracuse -University, adds this contribution: “Why is there -still so much poverty? One reason is because -nature or the devil has made some men weak and -imbecile and others lazy and worthless, and neither -man nor God can do much for one who will do nothing -for himself.” Mr. Rockefeller appeals both to evolution -and to divine sanction. “The growth of a large -business,” he is reported as declaring in one of his -Sunday-school addresses, “is merely a survival of -the fittest.... The American Beauty rose can be -produced in the splendor and fragrance which bring -cheer to its beholder only by sacrificing the early -buds which grow up around it. This is not an evil -tendency in business. It is merely the working out -of a law of nature and a law of God.”</p> - -<p>It matters not that many millions of men, tirelessly<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30">[30]</a></span> -energetic and reasonably intelligent, can be shown to -have toiled all their lives without winning even a -competence. Nor does it matter that some of these, -in addition to being energetic and intelligent, have -been reasonably honest. To be honest, as this world -goes, is to be one man picked out of ten thousand; -and the fact that most of the greater affairs of the -business world sooner or later find their way into the -courts, for the testing of the amount and quality of -honesty involved therein, might well cause some -hesitation in positing this virtue as a necessary qualification -for “business.” But the notion is not to be -argued with; it is a characteristic outcropping of the -seigniorial mind.</p> - -<p>The praise of labor is the antiphony to the praise -of “business,” and the lyres of all the magnates are -strung tensely when chanting tributes to toil.</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> -<div class="stanza"> -<div class="indentquotebase">“Round swings the hammer of industry, quickly the sharp chisel rings,</div> -<div class="indentbase">And the heart of the toiler has throbbings that stir not the bosom of kings,”</div> -</div></div></div> - -<p>warbles Mr. Flint in his article on “Combinations -and Critics,” in “The Trust: Its Book.” Toil is the -foundation of wealth, they all aver, though the rhapsodical -nature of the tributes prevents a clear and -definite utterance on the question, Of <em>whose</em> wealth -is it the foundation? But there is no lack of definiteness -regarding their attitude toward those defensive -societies, the trade-unions, which the toilers organize -to secure a larger part of their product to themselves. -Mr. Flint, indeed, somewhat cautiously acknowledges<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31">[31]</a></span> -an element for good in the unions, but the -general attitude of the seigniorial mind is distinctly -inimical. The recent interesting correspondence between -the coal magnates and President Mitchell is an -instance in point; so are the frequent utterances on -the subject by the president of the steel trust, and -any number of examples could be given of a like -character. A crowning example of a distinctly feudal -attitude is furnished by a letter from a prominent -New York merchant, printed in the issue of June -9, 1902, of a newspaper which makes a considerable -to-do about the printing of such of the news as it -sees fit to print. The prominent merchant objects -very strongly to labor leaders and walking delegates, -describing them in almost as temperate and judicial -language as that of United States District Judge -Jackson. The flower of his contribution is his -seigniorial remedy for strikes:—</p> - -<p>“The only remedy, in my opinion, for strikes is to -get as many men as there are officers in the different -[labor] associations admitted to their meetings, where -they would have a chance to talk to the men in a -businesslike way, explaining matters to them in such a -manner as to bring the effects of a strike very plainly -before them.”</p> - -<p>Moral suasion, however, is not the only method -suggested for bringing sense to the workers. A -hint of more forcible means is occasionally broached. -A New York newspaper, which makes a boast of -printing unimpeachable interviews, reports, in its -issue of July 31st last, a significant warning from the -president of the New York, Ontario and Western Railroad.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32">[32]</a></span> -This is one of the coal-carrying railroads, and -the reference is to the anthracite strike. “After the -men return to work,” he said, “I believe that legal -steps will be taken in the United States courts -against those who are responsible for the loss occasioned -by the strike.” The Hon. Abram S. Hewitt -echoed this interesting suggestion in an interview of -August 25th. “The consequences of such strikes,” -he says, “are so disastrous, not merely to the parties -directly concerned, but to the whole community, that -every effort should be made as soon as the existing -strike has been called off and the excitement is -abated to prevent by appropriate legislation the recurrence -of such calamitous conflicts where everybody -is injured and no one is benefited.” Criminal codes, -it may be said generally, depend largely on the economic -conditions of the time and place where they -obtain: horse-stealing, in a community girdled by -trolley lines, degenerates to petty larceny, while in -Wyoming or Arabia it is a capital offence. In the -new order, which requires peace and stability for its -proper operation, it may readily enough come about -that voluntary leaving of work will be severely -penalized.</p> - - -<h3>II</h3> - -<p>The new seigniorial attitude toward government -and public policy is also significant. Often it is -paternalistic in a princely degree. The offer of a -retired magnate to settle a great national problem by -paying to the Government the $20,000,000 demanded<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_33" id="Page_33">[33]</a></span> -of Spain, on condition that the Filipinos be “set -free,” had in it something of the “grand style” -which Matthew Arnold so extols. The rallying to -the defence of the Government’s gold reserve by certain -financiers, several years ago, need not be instanced, -since in certain quarters it is gravely -suspected that their interest was not entirely platonic. -But certainly the recent offer of a wealthy magnate -to pay one-third of the cost of repairing all the roads -in the vicinity of Lakewood, N.J., showed the true -seigniorial spirit. Not different in kind, though somewhat -in degree, was the recent action of a Pittsburg -magnate, on the rude refusal of the Department of -Public Works to pave his street otherwise than with -blocks at a cost of 65 cents the square yard, in -doing the thing himself at a cost of $4.50 the square -yard.</p> - -<p>Usually, however, the seigniorial attitude toward -government is somewhat more in the direction of -intervention. The seasonal migration to Washington -of representatives of all the great commercial interests -has become a salient datum in political zoölogy. -Curiosity regarding a proposed parcels post or -government telegraph alone draws hundreds of these -birds of passage there. The rights of private initiative -must be maintained at any cost. In the great -West one of the prime necessities for a living is the -access to water for irrigation purposes. One may -have land; but, if he has not water to irrigate it, the -soil is worthless. The prevailing sentiment is for -public ownership of waterways, since, in many places, -monopoly controls the supply. At the electrical convention<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_34" id="Page_34">[34]</a></span> -held at San Francisco recently, the presiding -officer, who is also the president of a public-service -corporation, after denouncing organized labor and -municipal ownership, added: “For us a far more -dangerous agitation is that which now proposes State -appropriation of all water rights. The scheme advocated -makes the appropriation little less than sheer -confiscation.” Luckily the seventy-one mile envelope -of air that encases the globe yet eludes monopolization.</p> - -<p>“Hands off!” is the warning to government; and -though occasionally government puts hands on, they -are not very closely or tenaciously applied. The -report of the Interstate Commerce Commission (1901), -for instance, employs a rather pessimistic tone regarding -government control of traffic rates. “We simply -call attention to the fact,” it recites, “that the decision -of the United States Supreme Court in the -Trans-Missouri case and the Joint Traffic Association -case has produced no practical effect upon the railway -operations of the country. Such associations, in -fact, exist now, as they did before those decisions, and -with the same general effect.” “Should the Supreme -Court declare the Northern railways consolidation -unconstitutional,” one of the interested magnates is -reported as saying, “we shall simply do the thing in -another way. It is something that must be done.” -Cynically frank is Mr. Dodd, in his Syracuse address, -regarding the Anti-trust law. “A modern Federal -law also exists,” he says, “which, literally interpreted, -forbids business of any magnitude; but -Federal judges have thus far found it easier to dismiss<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_35" id="Page_35">[35]</a></span> -proceedings under it than to guess at its real -meaning.” The president of the Southern Pacific -Railroad takes the bull by the horns, and denounces -all interference. In an interview given to the press -June 2d of the present year, he declares that “the -legislation of the future must be pro-railroad instead -of anti-railroad.... I believe commissions are -things of the past. I do not think transportation -companies should have to submit to dictation or -control by bodies who do not know anything about -transportation.”</p> - -<p>The Contract-labor law is another measure, to the -seigniorial mind, unnecessary and obstructive, and its -provisions, therefore, are but lightly observed. Known -evasions have been numerous; and, were the full -truth revealed, it would probably be found that this -law has met with about the same degree of observance -as have the Interstate Commerce and Anti-trust -laws. As recently as July 16th, comes word from -Berlin to the Chicago <cite>Daily News</cite> that “agents of -American railroads are canvassing the Polish and -Slavic districts of Europe for laborers, to whom they -offer $2.50 a day and board, regardless of the Federal -Contract-labor law.”</p> - -<p>Not only do the magnates demand immunity from -government interference in their business affairs, but -they demand also a more real, if not a more obvious, -share in the operations of government. The invasion, -during the last ten years, of the National Senate -by a number of the magnates or their legates is -a part of the process; but something more to the -point is their insistence on the right to be consulted<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36">[36]</a></span> -in grave affairs by the President and Cabinet. A -New York daily newspaper, edited by the distinguished -scholar who delivers lectures on journalism -before Yale University, published last February an -account of a remarkable gathering at Washington. -It verges closely upon contumacy to mention the -names of the attending magnates, such is their -eminence, and they will therefore not be given. -Their purpose was to protest to the President against -a repetition of his action in the Northern Securities -case. “The financiers declare,” says this newspaper, -“that they should have been notified of the -intended Federal action last week, so that they could -be prepared to support the stock market, and that -their unpreparedness came very near bringing on a -panic. Had not the big interests of the street been -in possession of the bulk of securities, instead of -speculators and small holders, there would have been -a panic, the capitalists assert.” It is, when considered, -a modest claim—the powers of an extra-constitutional -cabinet, intrusted with the conservation -of the public peace. There is no proof that the -claim has been conceded, though some light is thrown -on the problem by the newspaper’s further declaration -that the chief magnate, after an interview with -the President, “felt very much better.”</p> - -<p>Something of the same nature was revealed in the -negotiations last March between the Mayor of New -York City and the directors of the New York Central -Railroad Company. The company requested the -Mayor to secure the withdrawal of the Wainwright -bill in the State Assembly, compelling the railroad<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_37" id="Page_37">[37]</a></span> -to abandon steam in the Park Avenue tunnel by a -fixed date, and promised to do the required thing in -its own time and at its own pleasure. The letter of -the Mayor to Assemblyman Bedell records the result: -“This letter [of the directors] seems to me to -lay a good foundation for the waiving a fixed date to -be named in the bill;” and the date was accordingly -“waived.”</p> - -<p>Of the seigniorial attitude toward the police law, -the abundant crop of automobile cases alone furnishes -signal testimony. Dickens made a highly dramatic, -though perhaps rather unhistorical, use in his “A -Tale of Two Cities” of the riding down of a child -by a marquis, and the long train of tragic consequences -that ensued. We do the thing differently -in our day: we acquit, or at most fine the marquis, -and the matter rests; we are too deferential to carry -it further. Fast driving in the new “machines” has -become one of the tests of courage, manliness, and -skill,—what jousting in full armor was in the fifteenth -century, or duelling with pistols in the early -part of the nineteenth,—and if the police law interferes, -the exploit is the more hazardous and therefore -the more emulatory. The scion of a great house -who recently, on being arrested for fast driving and -then bailed, subsequently sent his valet to the police -court to pay the fine, showed the true seigniorial -spirit. Possibly, though, had his identity been known -before arrest, he would have escaped the irritating -interference of the law; for it happened, about the -same time, on the arrest for the same offence of a -millionnaire attorney, companioned by a Supreme<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_38" id="Page_38">[38]</a></span> -Court judge, that a too vigilant policeman came to -learn his severest lesson—that to know whom not -to trouble is the better part of valor.</p> - -<p>At Newport, the summer home of the seigniorial -class, the automobile enforces a right of way. This -is not sufficient, however, for the automobilists, who -would prefer a sole and exclusive way. In the summer -of 1901 the resident magnates fixed upon a certain -Friday afternoon for their motor races, and -demanded exclusive control of Ocean, Harrison, and -Carroll avenues between the hours of two and four -o’clock. In the “grand style” characterizing the -dealings of this class with the public, the magnates -offered to pay all the fines if the races led to any -prosecutions. This meant, of course, that the ordinance -prohibiting a speed greater than ten miles an -hour was to be overlooked, since the races would -surely have developed speed up to forty, fifty, and -sixty miles an hour. The deferential City Council -acquiesced. For once, however, the ever serviceable -injunction was found to be available against other -persons than striking workmen. A few property -owners sought refuge in the Supreme Court, a temporary -injunction was issued by Judge Wilbur, and, -though the magnates hired lawyers to fight it, the -order was made permanent. It is but natural that -keen resentment should follow this high-handed -action of the courts. It is announced that some of -the magnates are tiring of Newport, and one of the -wealthiest of them has recently threatened to forsake -the place entirely.</p> - -<p>Laws are like cobwebs, said Anacharsis the Scythian,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39">[39]</a></span> -where the small flies are caught and the great -break through. Yet that even the great can sometimes -bow to the reign of law, and particularly that -the seigniorial mind can on occasion be conciliatory, -is well illustrated by the recent action of the governors -of the Automobile Club, in suspending two -members and disciplining a third, for fast driving. -The troublesome restrictions of the law on this point -are probably destined, however, to be soon abolished. -Already the Board of Freeholders of Essex County, -N.J., a region much frequented by automobilists, -has advanced the speed limit in the country districts -to twenty miles per hour. Further changes are expected, -and it will probably be but a short time -before a man with a “machine” will enjoy the God-given -right of “doing what he will with his own.”</p> - - -<h3>III</h3> - -<p>Most of the magnates show a frugal and a discriminating -mind in their benefactions; but it is a -prodigal mind indeed which governs the expenditures -that make for social ostentation. It is probable that -no aristocracy—not even that of profligate Rome -under the later Cæsars—ever spent such enormous -sums in display. Our aristocracy, avoiding the English -standards relating to persons engaged in trade, -welcomes the industrial magnate, and his vast wealth -and love of ostentation have set the pace for lavish -expenditure. Trade is the dominant phase of American -life,—the divine process by which, according -to current opinion, “the whole creation moves,”—and, -as it has achieved the conquest of most of our<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_40" id="Page_40">[40]</a></span> -social institutions and of our political powers, that -it should also dominate “society” is but a natural -sequence. Flaunting and garish consumption becomes -the basic canon in fashionable affairs. As -Mr. Thorstein Veblen, in his keen satire, “The -Theory of the Leisure Class,” puts it:—</p> - -<p>“Conspicuous consumption of valuable goods is -a means of reputability.... As wealth accumulates -on his [the magnate’s] hands, his own unaided -effort will not avail sufficiently to put his opulence -in evidence by this method. The aid of friends and -competitors is therefore brought in by resorting to -the giving of valuable presents and expensive feasts -and entertainments. Presents and feasts had probably -another origin than that of naïve ostentation, -but they acquired their utility for the purpose very -early, and they have retained that character to the -present.”</p> - -<p>The conspicuous consumption of other days was, -however, as compared with that of the present, but a -flickering candle flame to a great cluster of electric -lights. Against the few classic examples, such as -those of Cleopatra and Lucullus, our present aristocracy -can show hundreds; and the daily spectacle of -wasteful display might serve to make the earlier -Sybarites stare and gasp. Present-day fashionable -events come to be distinguished and remembered not -so much on the score of their particular features as -of their cost. A certain event is known as Mr. A’s -$5,000 breakfast, another as the Smith-Jones’s $15,000 -dinner, and another as Mrs. C’s $30,000 entertainment -and ball.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41">[41]</a></span></p> - -<p>Conspicuous eating becomes also a feature of -seigniorial life. The “society” and the “yellow” -journals are crowded with accounts of dinners and -luncheons, following one after another with an almost -incredible frequency. And not only is the frequency -remarkable, but the range and quantity of the viands -furnished almost challenge belief. So far, it is -believed, the journals which usually deal in that -sort of news have neglected to give an authoritative -menu for a typical day in the life of a seigniorial -family. We have dinner menus, luncheon menus, -and so on, but nothing in the way of showing what -is consumed by the individual or family during a term -of twenty-four hours. Some light on the subject, -however, is furnished by Mr. George W. E. Russell, -the talented author of “Collections and Recollections,” -in his recent volume, “An Onlooker’s Note-book.” -Objection may be made to the effect that -Mr. Russell is an Englishman, and that he is describing -an English royal couple. But the demurrer is -irrelevant, since it is well known that our seigniorial -class founds its practices and its canons (excepting -only the canon regarding persons engaged in trade) -upon English precedents, and that English precedents -are made by the Royal Family. And not only does -our home nobility imitate English models, but it piles -Pelion upon Ossa, and seeks constantly to outshine and -overdo the actions of its transatlantic cousins. Mrs. -George Cornwallis-West (formerly Lady Randolph -Churchill) recently stated that the vast sums spent -by Americans in England have lifted the standard -of living to a scale of magnificence almost unknown<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_42" id="Page_42">[42]</a></span> -before. So for whatever is shown to be English -custom, something must be added for American -improvement and extension when assuming its transplantation -to these shores. Mr. Russell writes:—</p> - -<p>“A royal couple arranged to pay a two nights’ -visit to a country house of which the owners were -friends of mine. For reasons of expediency, we will -call the visitors the duke and duchess, though that -was not their precise rank. When a thousand preparations -too elaborate to be described here had been -made for the due entertainment of them and their -suite and their servants, the private secretary wrote -to the lady of the house, enclosing a written memorandum -of his royal master’s and mistress’s requirements -in the way of meals. I reproduce the substance -of the memorandum—and in these matters my memory -never plays tricks. The day began with cups of -tea brought to the royal bedroom. While the duke -was dressing, an egg beaten up in sherry was served -to him, not once, but twice. The duke and duchess -breakfasted together in their private sitting room, -where the usual English breakfast was served to -them. They had their luncheon with their hosts -and the house party, and ate and drank like other -people. Particular instructions were given that at 5 -o’clock tea there must be something substantial in -the way of eggs, sandwiches, or potted meat, and -this meal the royal couple consumed with special -gusto. Dinner was at 8.30, on the limited and abbreviated -scale which the Prince of Wales introduced—two -soups, two kinds of fish, two entrées, a joint, two -sorts of game, a hot and cold sweet, and a savory,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43">[43]</a></span> -with the usual accessories in the way of oysters, -cheese, ice, and dessert. This is pretty well for an -abbreviated dinner. But let no one suppose that the -royal couple went hungry to bed. When they retired, -supper was served to them in their private sitting -room, and a cold chicken and a bottle of claret were -left in their bedroom, as a provision against emergencies.”</p> - -<p>All the men of great wealth are not men of leisure. -Some of them work as hard as do common laborers. -For such as these the tremendous gastronomy recounted -by Mr. Russell would be impossible as a -daily exercise. When, therefore, it is assumed of any -of our seigniorial class, it must be limited to magnates -on vacation, to their leisurely sons, nephews, -hangers-on, and women, and to those who have retired -from active pursuits. But there are other canons of -social reputability besides personal leisure and personal -wasteful consumption. These are, to quote -again from Mr. Veblen, vicarious leisure and vicarious -consumption—the leisure and lavishness of wives, -sons, and daughters. It is these who, in large part, at -New York, Lenox, and Newport, support the social -reputation of their seigniorial husbands and fathers. -The “dog parties,” wherein the host “puts on a dog -collar and barks for the delectation of his guests,” the -“vegetable parties,” wherein host and guests, perhaps -from some latent sense of inner likeness, make themselves -up to represent cabbage heads and other garden -products, the “monkey parties,” the various “circuses” -and like events, are given and participated in -more generally by the vicarious upholders of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44">[44]</a></span> -magnate’s social reputation than by the seignior himself.</p> - -<p>But in ways more immediate—by means which -do not conflict with his daily vocation—the working -magnate gives signal example of that virtue of capitalistic -“abstinence” which is the foundation of orthodox -political economy. The splendors of his town -house, his country estate, and his steam yacht, to say -nothing of his club, are repeatedly described to us in -the columns of popular periodicals. His paintings, -decorations, and bric-à-brac, his orchids and roses, his -blooded animals and his $10,000 Panhard, are depicted -in terms which make one wonder how paltry and mean -must have been the possessions of Midas and how -bare the “wealth of Ormus and of Ind.” And when, -for a time, he lays down the reins of power, and betakes -himself to Saratoga or Newport or Monte Carlo, yet -more wonderful accounts are given of his lavish expenditure. -The betting at the Saratoga race-tracks last -August is reported to have averaged $2,000,000 a day. -“The money does not come,” said that eminent maker -of books, Mr. Joe Ullman, “from any great plunger -or group of plungers, but from the great assemblage of -rich men who are willing to bet from $100 to $1,000 -on their choices in a race.” On the transatlantic -steamers, in London and in Paris, the same prodigality -is seen. A king’s ransom—or what is more to -the point, the ransom of a hundred families from a -year’s suffering—is lost or won in an hour’s play or -lightly expended for some momentary satisfaction.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_45" id="Page_45">[45]</a></span></p> - - -<h3>IV</h3> - -<p>There remain for brief mention the benefactions of -the magnates. Most of these come under the head of -“conspicuous giving.” Gifts for educational, religious, -and other public purposes last year reached the total -of $107,360,000. In separate amounts they ran all -the way from the $5,000 gift of a soap or lumber -magnate to the $13,000,000 that had their origin in -steel. It is an interesting list for study in that it -reveals more significantly than some of the instances -given the standards and temper of the seigniorial -mind. An anonymous writer, evidently of Jacobinical -tendencies, some time ago suggested in the columns -of a well-known periodical a list of measures for the -support of which rich men might honorably and wisely -devote a part of their fortunes:—</p> - -<p>“He [the rich man] could begin by requiring the -assessors to hand him a true bill of his own obligations -to the public. He could continue the good work -by persuading the collector to accept a check for the -whole amount. This would make but a small draft -upon his total accumulations. A further considerable -sum he could wisely devote to paying the salaries of -honorable lobbyists, who should labor with legislative -bodies to secure the enactment of just laws, which -would relieve hard-working farmers, struggling shopkeepers, -mechanics trying to pay for mortgaged -houses, and widows who have received a few thousand -dollars of life insurance money, from their present -obligation to support the courts, the militia, and other -organs of government that protect the rich man’s<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_46" id="Page_46">[46]</a></span> -property and enable him to collect his bills receivable. -Finally, if these two expenditures did not sufficiently -diminish his surplus, he could purchase newspapers -and pay editors to educate the public in sound principles -of social justice, as applied to taxation and to various -other matters.”</p> - -<p>Perhaps it is not singular that no part of the gifts -of the great magnates is ever devoted to any of these -purposes. Doubtless they see no flaw, or at least no -remediable defect, in the present industrial régime. It -is the régime under which they have risen to fortune -and power, and it is therefore justified by its fruits. -Their benefactions are thus always directed to a -more or less obvious easement of the conditions of -those on whom the social fabric most heavily rests. -Hospitals, asylums, and libraries are the objects, -though recently a bathing beach for poor children -has been added to the list. The propriety of securing -learned justification of the existing régime causes -also a considerable giving to schools, colleges, and -churches. But nowhere can there be found a seigniorial -gift which, directly or indirectly, makes for -modification of the prevailing economic system.</p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"></div><!--Page break for ePub--> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_47" id="Page_47">[47]</a></span></p> - - - - -<h2>CHAPTER IV<br /> -<span class="titlefont smcap">Our Farmers and Wage-earners</span></h2> - - -<p>The increasing dependence of middleman and -petty manufacturer has already been considered. -The same pressure which bears upon these bears also -upon farmer and wage-earner. The editorials and -the oratory of election years, it is true, supply us with -recurring pæans over the independence, the self-reliance -and the prosperity of these classes, and such -graphic tropes as “the full dinner pail” and “the -overflowing barn,” become the party shibboleths of -political campaigns. Plain facts, however, accord but -ill with this exultant strain.</p> - - -<h3>I</h3> - -<p>In most ages the working farmer has been the -dupe and prey of the rest of mankind. Now by -force and now by cajolery, as social customs and political -institutions change, he has been made to produce -the food by which the race lives, and the share -of his product which he has been permitted to keep -for himself has always been pitifully small. Whether -Roman slave, Frankish serf, or English villein; -whether the so-called “independent” farmer of a -free democracy or the <em>ryot</em> of a Hindu prince, the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_48" id="Page_48">[48]</a></span> -general rule holds good. Occasionally, by one means -or another, he gains some transitory betterment of -condition; the Plague of 1349 and the Peasants’ -Rebellion of 1381 won for his class advantages which -were retained during three generations. But in the -long run he is the race’s martyr. Under a military -autocracy his exploitation was inevitable. There is -no reason for it now, for the lives and well-being -of the rest of mankind are in his hands: were the -working farmers organized as the manufacturers and -the skilled artisans are organized, and could they lay -by for themselves a year’s necessities, they could -starve the race into submission to their demands. -But the thing is not to be; nor, indeed, is any marked -change to their advantage likely to happen, for, so far -as current tendencies point, the future is to repeat -the past.</p> - -<p>In our day and in our land both force and cajolery -conspire to keep the peasant farmer securely in his -traces. He cannot break through the cordon which -the trusts and the railroads put about him; and even -if he could he would not, since the influences showered -upon him are specifically directed to the end of keeping -him passive and contented. Our statisticians -assure him of his prosperity; our politicians and our -moulders of opinion warn him of the pernicious influence -of unions like the Farmers’ Alliance, and -further preach to him the comforting doctrine that -by “raising more corn and less politics” he will ultimately -work out a blissful salvation. Sometimes he -must burn his corn for fuel; often he cannot sell his -grain for the cost of production, even though many<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_49" id="Page_49">[49]</a></span> -thousands of persons in the great cities may be hungering -for it; frequently he cannot afford to send his -children to school, and in a steadily increasing number -of cases he is forced to abandon his farm and -become a tenant or a wanderer. He is puzzled, no -doubt, by these things; but they are all carefully and -neatly explained to him from the writings and preachments -of profound scholars, as “natural” and “inevitable” -phenomena. His ethical sense may be -somewhat disturbed by the explanations, but he -learns that it is useless to protest, and he thereupon -acquiesces.</p> - -<p>A sort of symposium on the joys of the farmer is -to be found in the September number of the <cite>American -Review of Reviews</cite>. Mr. Clarence H. Matson -writes of improved conditions due to rural free delivery -of mails and a few other reforms; Mr. William -R. Draper dilates upon the enormous revenues which -have flowed to the farmers during the current year, and -Professor Henry C. Adams contributes a symphony -on the diffusion of agricultural prosperity. A fourth -article, by Mr. Cy Warman, furnishes a rather discordant -note to the general harmony, since it shows -a large and increasing immigration of our prosperous -farmers into Canada. Some 20,000 crossed the border -last year, according to Mr. Warman, while during -the first four months of 1902, 11,480 followed, and -indications pointed to a total of 40,000 emigrants for -the present year. The official figures of the Canadian -Government, since published, partly confirm -these estimates. The number of immigrants from -the United States for the year ended June 30, 1902,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_50" id="Page_50">[50]</a></span> -was 22,000. The number for the current year will -probably be larger, for according to a Montreal press -despatch of September 17th: “The immigration from -the American to the Canadian Northwest has assumed -much greater proportions this year than ever before, -and land sales to Americans are daily reported. The -latest large sale is by the Saskatchewan Valley Land -Company, which has sold 100,000 acres in Saskatchewan -to an American syndicate for $500,000.”</p> - -<p>“The American farmer,” sententiously and truthfully -remarks Professor Adams, “does not hoard his -cash.” He gives no reason for the fact, and the -determination must be left to the reader. “The -American farmer,” he further remarks, “is, as a rule, -his own landlord.” This statement reveals a very -serious misapprehension of the facts. Something -more than every third farm in the United States, -according to the recent census, is operated by a tenant. -Moreover, the proportion of tenants is constantly -rising. For the whole country, tenants -operated 25.5 per cent of all farms in 1880, 28.4 per -cent in 1890, and 35.3 per cent in 1900. Further, -the tendency is not confined to particular sections, -but is common to the whole country. During the -last decade the number of tenant-operated farms increased -relatively to the whole number of farms in -every State and Territory except Maine, Vermont, and -New Hampshire. In Maine tenantry decreased -seven-tenths of 1 per cent, in New Hampshire five-tenths -of 1 per cent, and in Vermont one-tenth of -1 per cent. For the twenty-year period, as was -pointed out in Chapter II, the only exceptions to the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_51" id="Page_51">[51]</a></span> -general increase are Arizona, Florida, and New -Hampshire.</p> - -<p>The recent census, out of its abundant optimism, -does not segregate these facts, and makes no general -comment other than that tenantry has increased and -that salaried management is believed to be “constantly -increasing.” The bulletin on “Agriculture: The -United States” does not even furnish a general classified -summary of the data on tenantry. But the -separate reports give the statistics, and out of them -the following table is compiled:—</p> - -<p class="center" style="margin-top:1em">INCREASE OF FARM TENANTRY</p> - - -<div class="center" style="margin-bottom:1em"> -<table class="per" border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0" summary="Percent"> -<tr><td class="pertitle1" colspan="2"><span class="smcap">States and Territories</span></td><td class="pertitle" colspan="3"><span class="smcap">Per Cent of Farms operated by Tenants</span></td></tr> -<tr><td colspan="2"></td><td class="perpercent1" style="padding-bottom:0.5em">1880</td><td class="perpercent1" style="padding-bottom:0.5em">1890</td><td class="perpercent1" style="padding-bottom:0.5em">1900</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">1.</td><td class="perstate">Alabama</td><td class="perpercent1">46.8</td><td class="perpercent1">48.6</td><td class="perpercent1">57.7</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">2.</td><td class="perstate">Arizona</td><td class="perpercent1">13.2</td><td class="perpercent1">7.9</td><td class="perpercent2"><span style="padding-right:0.7em"><em>a.</em></span>8.4<a name="FNanchor_1_1" id="FNanchor_1_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber"></td><td class="perstate"></td><td class="perpercent1"></td><td class="perpercent1"></td><td class="perpercent2"><em>b.</em> 11.9<a name="FNanchor_2_2" id="FNanchor_2_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a></td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">3.</td><td class="perstate">Arkansas</td><td class="perpercent1">30.9</td><td class="perpercent1">32.1</td><td class="perpercent1">45.4</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">4.</td><td class="perstate">California</td><td class="perpercent1">19.8</td><td class="perpercent1">17.8</td><td class="perpercent1">23.1</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">5.</td><td class="perstate">Colorado</td><td class="perpercent1">13.0</td><td class="perpercent1">11.3</td><td class="perpercent1">22.6</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">6.</td><td class="perstate">Connecticut</td><td class="perpercent1">10.2</td><td class="perpercent1">11.5</td><td class="perpercent1">12.9</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">7.</td><td class="perstate">Delaware</td><td class="perpercent1">42.4</td><td class="perpercent1">46.9</td><td class="perpercent1">50.3</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">8.</td><td class="perstate">District of Columbia</td><td class="perpercent1">38.2</td><td class="perpercent1">36.7</td><td class="perpercent1">43.1</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">9.</td><td class="perstate">Florida</td><td class="perpercent1">30.9</td><td class="perpercent1">23.6</td><td class="perpercent1">26.5</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">10.</td><td class="perstate">Georgia</td><td class="perpercent1">44.9</td><td class="perpercent1">53.5</td><td class="perpercent1">59.9</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">11.</td><td class="perstate">Idaho</td><td class="perpercent1">4.7</td><td class="perpercent1">4.6</td><td class="perpercent1">8.7</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">12.</td><td class="perstate">Illinois</td><td class="perpercent1">21.4</td><td class="perpercent1">24.0</td><td class="perpercent1">29.3</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">13.</td><td class="perstate">Indiana</td><td class="perpercent1">23.7</td><td class="perpercent1">25.4</td><td class="perpercent1"> 28.6</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">14.</td><td class="perstate">Iowa</td><td class="perpercent1">23.8</td><td class="perpercent1">28.1</td><td class="perpercent1">34.9</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">15.</td><td class="perstate">Kansas</td><td class="perpercent1">16.3</td><td class="perpercent1">28.2</td><td class="perpercent1">33.2</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">16.</td><td class="perstate">Kentucky</td><td class="perpercent1">26.4</td><td class="perpercent1">24.9</td><td class="perpercent1">32.8<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_52" id="Page_52">[52]</a></span></td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">17.</td><td class="perstate">Louisiana</td><td class="perpercent1">35.2</td><td class="perpercent1">44.4</td><td class="perpercent1">58.0</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">18.</td><td class="perstate">Maine</td><td class="perpercent1">4.3</td><td class="perpercent1">5.4</td><td class="perpercent1">4.7</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">19.</td><td class="perstate">Maryland</td><td class="perpercent1">31.0</td><td class="perpercent1">31.0</td><td class="perpercent1">33.6</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">20.</td><td class="perstate">Massachusetts</td><td class="perpercent1">8.2</td><td class="perpercent1">9.3</td><td class="perpercent1">9.6</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">21.</td><td class="perstate">Michigan</td><td class="perpercent1">10.0</td><td class="perpercent1">14.0</td><td class="perpercent1">15.9</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">22.</td><td class="perstate">Minnesota</td><td class="perpercent1">9.2</td><td class="perpercent1">12.9</td><td class="perpercent1">17.3</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">23.</td><td class="perstate">Mississippi</td><td class="perpercent1">43.8</td><td class="perpercent1">52.8</td><td class="perpercent1">62.4</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">24.</td><td class="perstate">Missouri</td><td class="perpercent1">27.3</td><td class="perpercent1">26.8</td><td class="perpercent1">30.5</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">25.</td><td class="perstate">Montana</td><td class="perpercent1">5.3</td><td class="perpercent1">4.8</td><td class="perpercent1">9.2</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">26.</td><td class="perstate">Nebraska</td><td class="perpercent1">18.0</td><td class="perpercent1">24.7</td><td class="perpercent1">36.9</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">27.</td><td class="perstate">Nevada</td><td class="perpercent1">9.7</td><td class="perpercent1">7.5</td><td class="perpercent1">11.4</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">28.</td><td class="perstate">New Hampshire</td><td class="perpercent1">8.1</td><td class="perpercent1">8.0</td><td class="perpercent1">7.5</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">29.</td><td class="perstate">New Jersey</td><td class="perpercent1">24.6</td><td class="perpercent1">27.2</td><td class="perpercent1">36.9</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">30.</td><td class="perstate">New Mexico</td><td class="perpercent1">8.1</td><td class="perpercent1">4.5</td><td class="perpercent1">9.4</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">31.</td><td class="perstate">New York</td><td class="perpercent1">16.5</td><td class="perpercent1">20.2</td><td class="perpercent1">23.9</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">32.</td><td class="perstate">North Carolina</td><td class="perpercent1">33.5</td><td class="perpercent1">34.1</td><td class="perpercent1">41.4</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">33.</td><td class="perstate">North Dakota</td><td class="perpercent2">3.9<a name="FNanchor_3_3" id="FNanchor_3_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a></td><td class="perpercent1">6.9</td><td class="perpercent1">8.5</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">34.</td><td class="perstate">Ohio</td><td class="perpercent1">19.3</td><td class="perpercent1">22.9</td><td class="perpercent1">27.5</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">35.</td><td class="perstate">Oklahoma</td><td class="perpercent1"></td><td class="perpercent1">0.7</td><td class="perpercent1">21.0</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">36.</td><td class="perstate">Oregon</td><td class="perpercent1">14.1</td><td class="perpercent1">12.5</td><td class="perpercent1">17.8</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">37.</td><td class="perstate">Pennsylvania</td><td class="perpercent1">21.2</td><td class="perpercent1">23.3</td><td class="perpercent1">26.0</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">38.</td><td class="perstate">Rhode Island</td><td class="perpercent1">19.9</td><td class="perpercent1">18.7</td><td class="perpercent1">20.1</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">39.</td><td class="perstate">South Carolina</td><td class="perpercent1">50.3</td><td class="perpercent1">55.3</td><td class="perpercent1">61.0</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">40.</td><td class="perstate">South Dakota</td><td class="perpercent2">3.9<a href="#Footnote_3_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a></td><td class="perpercent1">13.2</td><td class="perpercent1">21.8</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">41.</td><td class="perstate">Tennessee</td><td class="perpercent1">34.5</td><td class="perpercent1">30.8</td><td class="perpercent1">40.5</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">42.</td><td class="perstate">Texas</td><td class="perpercent1">37.6</td><td class="perpercent1">41.9</td><td class="perpercent1">49.7</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">43.</td><td class="perstate">Utah</td><td class="perpercent1">4.6</td><td class="perpercent1">5.2</td><td class="perpercent1">8.8</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">44.</td><td class="perstate">Vermont</td><td class="perpercent1">13.4</td><td class="perpercent1">14.6</td><td class="perpercent1">14.5</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">45.</td><td class="perstate">Virginia</td><td class="perpercent1">29.5</td><td class="perpercent1">26.9</td><td class="perpercent1">30.7</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">46.</td><td class="perstate">Washington</td><td class="perpercent1">7.2</td><td class="perpercent1">8.5</td><td class="perpercent1">14.4</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">47.</td><td class="perstate">West Virginia</td><td class="perpercent1">19.1</td><td class="perpercent1">17.8</td><td class="perpercent1">21.8</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber">48.</td><td class="perstate">Wisconsin</td><td class="perpercent1">9.1</td><td class="perpercent1">11.4</td><td class="perpercent1">13.5</td></tr> -<tr><td class="pernumber" style="border-bottom:1px solid black">49.</td><td class="perstate" style="border-bottom:1px solid black">Wyoming</td><td class="perpercent1" style="border-bottom:1px solid black">2.8</td><td class="perpercent1" style="border-bottom:1px solid black">4.2</td><td class="perpercent1" style="border-bottom:1px solid black">7.6</td></tr> -</table></div> - -<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_1" id="Footnote_1_1"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_1"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> Including Indian farms.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_2" id="Footnote_2_2"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_2"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> Excluding Indian farms.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_3" id="Footnote_3_3"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_3"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> Dakota Territory.</p></div></div> - - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_53" id="Page_53">[53]</a></span></p> - -<p>There were 2,026,286 tenants in 1900, an increase -in twenty years of 97.7 per cent. There were 3,713,371 -owners, part owners, “owners and tenants,” and -managers, an increase in twenty years of 24.4 per -cent. During the twenty-year period owners in -Washington increased less than fivefold, tenants tenfold. -Utah shows a doubling of the number of -owners, and a quadrupling of the number of tenants. -South Dakota, compared with Dakota Territory in -1880, reveals an increase of owners of two and one-half -times; of tenants, eighteen times. There are -28,669 fewer owners in New York State than in -1880, and 14,331 more tenants. Ownership has declined -and tenantry advanced, both absolutely and -relatively, in New Jersey. The great farming State -of Illinois has 15,044 fewer owners and 23,454 more -tenants than in 1880, and even the young Territory -of Oklahoma, wherein one might expect to find -evidences of increased ownership, reveals, for the -ten-year period, a two-hundred-fold increase of tenantry -and only a sixfold increase of ownership.</p> - -<p>From the foregoing table it will be seen that -while during the previous decade relative tenantry -declined slightly in several States, the tide has since -turned. Though the Southern States generally show -the greatest proportion of tenants, the greatest percentage -of increase is revealed in the Border, -Northern, and Western States. Tenants operate -62.4 per cent of all the farms of Mississippi, 61 per -cent of those of South Carolina. But while the -former is a growth since 1880 from 43.8 per cent, -and the latter from 50.3 per cent, Oklahoma (the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_54" id="Page_54">[54]</a></span> -comparison in this single instance is with 1890) increased -the percentage of its tenant-operated farms -from seven-tenths of 1 per cent to 21 per cent. -Washington doubled its percentage, Montana and -Utah very nearly so. Nearly one-third of the farms -of New Jersey are tenant farms, and more than one-third -of those of Kansas and Nebraska. Each of -these three States doubled its relative percentage of -tenant farmers for the twenty-year period. Even in -New York the proportion has grown since 1880 from -16.5 to 23.9 per cent. As marked as is the showing, -the whole situation is not revealed by the figures, for -the term “owners” in the reports includes “farms -operated by individuals who own a part of the land -and rent the remainder from others,” and “farms -operated under the joint direction and by the united -labor of two or more individuals, one owning the -farm or a part of it, and the other or others owning -no part but receiving for supervision or labor a share -of the products.”</p> - -<p>This remarkable growth of tenantry would be considered, -in any other than our own complacent days, -as an alarming, even an appalling fact. So blithely -and for so long a time have the changes been rung -upon the alleged fact of independent ownership that -everybody, including professors of political economy, -assumes its truth. But even when its baselessness is -clearly shown we shall hear little of an alarmist -nature from our publicists and teachers. Rather it -may be expected that their pronouncements will -change with the changing times, and that we shall -soon hear reiterated gratulations on the development<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_55" id="Page_55">[55]</a></span> -of tenantry. Is not the humble tenant’s security -greater, are not his troubles less? Need he worry -over taxes, foreclosures, and the like? Not at all; -and besides—not the least of considerations to our -paternalistic moulders of opinion—there is much -reason for satisfaction in the fact that, having no -land to mortgage, he will not be led into wildly -prodigal habits of life by a too ready recourse to the -money-lender.</p> - -<p>Considering the growth of tenantry, the increasing -migration to Canada, the flocking of rural residents -into the cities, and the frequent outright abandonment -of farms in several sections of the country, the -unsophisticated onlooker may naturally wonder at -the tales of agricultural prosperity which from time -to time appear in public print. Mr. Draper, in the -article previously mentioned, speculates somewhat -ingeniously over the financial returns due the farmer -for his crop for the present year. The figures are -certainly imposing when looked at as totals. The -wheat crop will sum up 700,500,000 bushels, and -each bushel will sell for 60 cents, making the net -value $580,100,000—a rather curious result, by the -way, not obtainable by any of the ordinary processes -of mathematics. The corn crop is to bring $776,985,300, -and the remaining crops follow, with large -values attached.</p> - -<p>But reduced to individual earnings, values of farm -products (according to the census, products other -than those fed to live stock) reveal a rather meagre -diffusion of prosperity. Of the 5,739,657 farms in -the United States, 1,319,856 are listed in the census<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_56" id="Page_56">[56]</a></span> -as hay and grain farms, for the reason that hay and -grain comprise 40 per cent of their total products. -The average size of these hay and grain farms is -159.3 acres, and the average value of this product -per acre in 1899 was $4.77. The number of miscellaneous -farms is 1,059,416, with an average acreage -of 106.8, and a product value of $4.12. Live-stock -farms number 1,564,714, with an average acreage of -226.9 and a product value of $3.47. Thus the average -productive yield of 70 per cent of all the farms and -80 per cent of all the farm land in the nation ranges -from $3.47 to $4.77 per acre. Flowers and plants, -it may be noted for comparison, yield the comfortable -return of $431.83 per acre; but their effect on the -general census is but slight, since the average product -value of all farms is but $4.47 per acre. But let no -one suppose that all this munificent sum goes to the -farmer. He pays 43 cents per acre for labor and -nearly 7 cents per acre for fertilizers. The net income -is thus $3.97 per acre.</p> - -<p>The size of farms is increasing, though actual agriculture -is probably confined to smaller holdings. The -average was 136.5 acres in 1890; it is now 146.6 acres. -The tendency varies in different parts of the country. -Nebraska increases her average from 190.1 acres in -1890 to 246.1 acres in 1900. Kansas shows almost -identical figures, while the New England States show -little change, and the Southern States generally show -reduced averages. The relation of size of farm to -kind of tenure is, however, the main point, and here -one discovers matter for reflection. Farms operated -by cash tenants have 102.7 acres apiece, by owners<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_57" id="Page_57">[57]</a></span> -134.1, by managers 1514.3. The growth of manorial -estates is dimly revealed in these figures, and there -is no need to doubt the census bulletin’s reserved -admission that farms operated by managers are believed -to be constantly increasing.</p> - -<p>The subject of the changing status of the farmer—a -change which involves his ultimate reduction to -a sixteenth-century level—is too large to receive -adequate treatment in these pages. By all considerations -it deserves the space of a generous -volume. For present purposes there remains to -be said that even where apparent ownership is retained -by the working farmer, effective ownership is -determined in other quarters. He is the joint tenant -of the farm implement trusts, of the new harvester -trust, of the produce trusts which fix the value of his -products, of the railroad trusts which fix the rate of -transportation to the market, and in the arid West -of the water trusts. Thus, even though he boasts -the possession of a title-deed to his land, the holding -is in reality of the nature of a fief, held at the mercy -of several superiors; and the tithes which he pays, -though less formally levied and exacted than were the -<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">redevances</i> of the mediæval peasant, are as many and -well-nigh as burdensome. And he must pay or go; for -there is no remission from his superiors, as in olden -days, on account of drouth, floods, locusts, or murrain.</p> - - -<h3>II</h3> - -<p>With the decline of the petty trades, the growth -of the combinations, and the concentration in fewer<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_58" id="Page_58">[58]</a></span> -hands of the machinery of production, the subordination -of the wage-earner becomes more certain and -more fixed. If ever he were a free agent,—in the -sense and to the degree that any one in human society -can be free,—the day is passed. Through agencies -constantly augmenting and extending, he is “cabin’d, -cribb’d, confin’d, bound in,” to a narrowing circle of -possible efforts. Divorced from the land and from -the tools of production, he can live only by accepting -such wages and conditions as are offered him; and -the terms are always such that the kernel of his -product goes to some other man, while the husks and -the tares remain his own portion. The patronizing -orators of Labor Day and of campaign times sometimes -delight to symbolize him as a sturdy Gulliver, -though it needs little reflection to see that it is the -Gulliver of Brobdingnag, and not that of Lilliput, that -more correctly figures his present status. The mass -of current tendencies tends to fix him as a dependent—a -unit of a lower order in a series of gradations -running up to the Big Men. “The corporation,” -writes Mr. Richmond,<a name="FNanchor_4_4" id="FNanchor_4_4"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> “holds of the State, and its -officers hold of the corporation, and their retainers,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_59" id="Page_59">[59]</a></span> -managers, and servants all hold the tenure of their -employment from their superiors in office, from the -highest to the lowest.” But whether corporation, or -partnership, or individual, employs the laborer’s services, -his status is practically the same. Trade-unions -and other labor societies tend to modify that -dependence; and occasionally social legislation, when -it runs the fierce gantlet of the courts, exerts a further -modification. But it is coming to be recognized -that there is a limit, perhaps now nearly attained, -beyond which the labor societies can exert no influence; -and as for social legislation, as will be shown -farther along, it has certainly reached its culmination.</p> - -<p>To the natural causes making for the laborer’s -subordination have been added in recent years certain -conscious and deliberate forces. There is a -collective pressure brought to bear upon his wages; -there is a collective antagonism maintained against -his unions; there is a growing movement in the -direction of holding him for the term of his profitable -service to the company or corporation by which he -is employed, and there is a judicial tendency to -pretend still to regard him, despite his changing -status, as an economically free agent, able to do -what he wills, and to protect himself from all injustice.</p> - - -<h3>III</h3> - -<p>The assurance of villein fidelity is a prime need of -a feudal order. The fidelity need not be personal, -as in the old days; instead, the altered ceremony of -“homage” may take in whole regiments by a single<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_60" id="Page_60">[60]</a></span> -rite. Recent acts of the great employers make -strongly for creating inducements for this fidelity. -In spite of instances of conduct like that of the coal -magnates of Pennsylvania, there is a growing tendency -to unite for life-long service the careers of the -more faithful workers with the corporations by whom -they are employed. “Model workshops,” and even -“model villages,” are unquestionably increasing in -numbers. Their character is almost pure paternalism—“enlightened -absolutism,” Professor Ely calls -it. Rarely have the workers themselves the slightest -word to say as to their construction or conduct. -What is thought to be good for them, what is thought -will win their devotion, is given them. Whether at -Pullman, Ill., at Dayton or Cleveland, Ohio, or at -Pelzer, S.C., the general spirit manifested is the -same. The perfervid chapter on “American Liberality -to Workmen,” which Mr. Nicholas Paine Gilman -gives us in his volume, “A Dividend to Labor,” -contains dozens of instances wherein employers -have indulged their benevolence by the gift of flower-pots, -wash-basins, and other cultural paraphernalia -to their employees. Mr. Victor H. Olmsted, in the -<cite>Bulletin</cite> of the Department of Labor for November, -1900, gives another, though somewhat duplicated, -list; and the Rev. Josiah Strong’s monthly journal, -<cite>Social Service</cite>, furnishes a current record of such -benevolences. The providences of the Colorado -Fuel and Iron Company alone make a remarkable -showing. This corporation has even a “sociological -department,” and it is at present building a -$10,000 mission at Bessemer, near Pueblo. The<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_61" id="Page_61">[61]</a></span> -plan of the mission, we read, is to have a refuge, -with all modern improvements, for “floaters,” or the -unemployed. These wayfarers may make a temporary -living by working in an attached woodyard. In -all its camps in Colorado this company has established -kindergartens, libraries, and, in remote places, -grade schools for the children of its employees. Its -hospital at the Pueblo works is said to be the best -equipped in the West. “It is the announced purpose -of this corporation,” we read, “to solve the -social problem.”</p> - -<p>Model workshops and the distribution of relief are -but a small part of the tendency. The giving of old-age -pensions, particularly by railroad companies, has -recently taken on the dimensions of a national movement. -The pension system is not a conspicuously -expensive one, for the numbers of workmen who live -long enough to avail themselves of its benefits are -but scant. The sums paid out for pensions by the -Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Relief Department in -eighteen years average $31,185.85 yearly—about the -salary of a first vice-president—and the employees -themselves have borne a considerable part of the -expense. A total of 697 pensions has been granted -during this time, but 365 of the beneficiaries have -considerately died, and thus reduced the expenses.</p> - -<p>The pension system as it obtains among railroads -is more or less an outgrowth of the relief association -begun by the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company -on May 1, 1880. Prototypes can possibly be found, -but this instance is the first of any consequence. -The State of Maryland revoked the charter of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_62" id="Page_62">[62]</a></span> -association in 1888. This was an embarrassing interruption, -but by no means a fatal one, for the -society was immediately reorganized as a department -of the company. The plan was to pay accident, sick, -and death benefits and old-age pensions, the company -contributing $33,500 yearly, and the employees -paying monthly dues based on their wages. Section -100 of the regulations for 1889 declares that “the -fund for the payment of pensions will be derived -wholly from the contributions of the company,” a -change from the earlier method in the direction of -pure paternalism. The usual age for pensioning is -sixty-five years, and the president and directors determine -the roll.</p> - -<p>The Pennsylvania Railroad Voluntary Relief Department -was begun in 1886. In a number of -respects it followed the details of the earlier association. -As to pensions, however, it put the matter -forward by arranging for the gradual growth of a -superannuation fund out of the department’s surplus. -There were six companies, according to Mr. William -Franklin Willoughby’s “Workingmen’s Insurance,” -that before 1898 had created regular insurance departments. -These were the Baltimore and Ohio, the -Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania west of Pittsburg, -the Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy, the Philadelphia -and Reading, and the Plant System. Though in -two or three instances the plans have been altered, all -these companies founded their pension systems on -employees’ contributions.</p> - -<p>The Pennsylvania’s fund reached the figure set -for it January 1, 1900, and the pension system was<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_63" id="Page_63">[63]</a></span> -proclaimed. On the first day of 1901 the Chicago and -Northwestern put in operation a gratuitous pension -system, appropriating $200,000 for the purpose. The -beneficiaries, all of whom must have been thirty years -with the company, were divided into two classes: -first, those seventy years old, who were to be retired -and pensioned at once; and second, those from sixty-five -to sixty-nine years inclusive, who were to be -retired and pensioned at the discretion of the pension -board. The rate fixed is one per cent per year -of service of the average monthly pay for the preceding -ten years. An employee whose average wages -were $55 per month, and who had been with the -company for thirty years, would thus receive $16.50 -a month.</p> - -<p>The Illinois Central proclaimed its pension system -July 1, 1901. On March 1, 1902, the Delaware, -Lackawanna, and Western took the same course, -appropriating $50,000. The terms are somewhat -more liberal, in that only twenty-five years’ service -is required, and that some employees may be retired -between the ages of sixty and sixty-five. The Metropolitan -Street Railway Company followed on March -6th, and the Philadelphia and Reading Company on -May 21. The details, while varying somewhat, are -in the main alike for all of these companies.</p> - -<p>Though the experiment is a comparatively frugal -one, there is no doubt that it brings compensatory -returns; for it serves to keep quiescent and faithful -large bodies of men, and perhaps to loosen the bonds -of the labor-union. It holds in servicemen above thirty-five -or forty-five years of age, for they know the difficulty<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_64" id="Page_64">[64]</a></span> -of securing work elsewhere; and it feeds them -with a more or less illusory hope of an ultimate pension. -Indeed, the motive of inducing a closer dependence -of the laborer upon the employer is more or less -frankly confessed. “Under it” (the pension system), -reads the Lackawanna’s advertisement to the public, -“the road and its employees are to be more closely -knit by substantial ties.” The president of the Metropolitan -Street Railway Company, however, sounds -a more altruistic and benevolent note. “My object -in establishing this department,” he is quoted as saying, -“is to preserve the future welfare of aged and -infirm employees and to recognize efficient and loyal -service.”</p> - -<p>Despite such benevolent professions there are grave -grounds for scepticism regarding the tangible benefit -of the system to the employees. If Hope lingers -with them, it must be because, as Mr. William Watson -sings, “airiest cheer suffices for her food.” For -both the ascertained results of an eighteen years’ -operation of the system, and a moment’s glance at -conditions surrounding the new applications of it, -point to a most rigorous limitation of its benefits. In -the first place, there is a growing disinclination to -employ in any industry men past forty-five years of -age. The new regulations of the Philadelphia and -Reading reduce even this limit ten years, prohibiting -the taking on of employees past thirty-five years of age, -except by the approval of the board of directors of -the company, although in special cases where unusual -qualifications are desired the age limit may be waived. -So general is this attitude of employers that the Chicago<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_65" id="Page_65">[65]</a></span> -Federation of Labor was recently moved to the -passing of a resolution proposing that “every unemployed -man forty-five years of age who cannot show -what the charity authorities call ‘visible means of -support’ shall be mercifully shot in a lawful and -orderly manner.” Moreover, the chances of a railroad -employee reaching the age of sixty-five or seventy -years are about equal to the chances of winning a -large sum at policy. Discharges are frequent and -arbitrary, and usually there is no appeal. Aside -from this, the casualties are enormous. Of the -191,198 railroad workers classed as trainmen employed -throughout the country in 1900, 1396 (or one in every -138) were killed, and 17,571 (or one in every 10.8) -injured. The corrected figures for 1901 (given to the -public in August of the present year) show about the -same percentages. Of the 209,043 trainmen, 1537 -(or one in every 136) were killed, and 16,715 (or one -in every 12.5) were injured. Thanks to the new -safety appliances, casualties caused by coupling and -uncoupling cars declined by 84 killed and 2461 -injured; but in other classes of accidents the percentages -brought the averages to near the previous figures. -At best, the chances of maiming or death constantly -increase with every one of the twenty-five or thirty -years’ service required for the earning of a pension. -In the Metropolitan (now Interurban) Street Railway -service, where accidents are few but discharges many, -the benevolent instincts of the president will prove -difficult of realization. This official admitted that discharges -had at one time reached an average of 300 a -month. An employee informed the author that he<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_66" id="Page_66">[66]</a></span> -knew of but two or three men in the entire service -whom the published terms entitled to pensions, while -another employee conceded a possible dozen.</p> - - -<h3>IV</h3> - -<p>The new Feudalism evidently requires a tempering—let -us say, a conservative adjustment—of the -wage-scale. Those whom the gods dower with plenty -may for the present give freely of their store, while -those who feel the parsimony of Providence must withhold. -The recent increase of 10 per cent in wages -given by the steel corporation, and the refusal of the -anthracite magnates to increase the average, according -to the Pennsylvania Bureau of Mines, of <span class="nowrap">79 <span class="fnum">1</span>/<span class="fden">2</span></span> cents -a day which their operatives now receive, are but -examples of the contrasts which may be expected -during the transition period. The collective feudal -policy will avoid both extremes. It will pay something -better than that which breeds discontent, something -less than that which breeds luxury and pride. It -will provide not exactly what the workers desire, but -what is good for them.</p> - -<p>Already the more or less collective pressure upon -the wage-scale shows its effects. Hon. Carroll D. -Wright’s 250 wage-quotations for 25 selected occupations -(<cite>Bulletin</cite> of the Department of Labor, September, -1898) reveal for the years 1895-98 a steady -decline from the wages paid in the panic years, -1893-94, to about the same wages as were paid in -1882. The figures in the <cite>Bulletin</cite> for September, -1900, pertain to 148 establishments, representing 26<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_67" id="Page_67">[67]</a></span> -industries and 192 occupations. They show a slight -increase for 1899 and another for 1900. This -slight increase, however, is resolved into a marked -decrease by the rise in the price of commodities necessary -for the average life. From July, 1897, to July, -1901, according to the careful index-figures published -in <cite>Dun’s Review</cite>, the price of commodities advanced -27 per cent; and from July 1 to December 1, of the -latter year, an almost steady advance was recorded. -Comparing January 1, 1896, with January 1, 1902, -the <cite>Wall Street Journal</cite> finds an increase of 36 per -cent.</p> - -<p>The wage-quotations used by Col. Wright in his -table of 1898 are from the larger cities, and pertain -to trades the workmen in which are organized. Here, -if anywhere, one would expect evidences of increased -wages. Generally, however, the figures for 1897-98 -show a parity with the figures for 1881-82. Compositors, -for instance, received <span class="nowrap">$2.81 <span class="fnum">1</span>/<span class="fden">2</span></span> daily in 1898, -$2.81 in 1882. Carpenters received <span class="nowrap">$2.52 <span class="fnum">3</span>/<span class="fden">4</span></span> in 1898, -$2.55 in 1882. Often the figures for the latter year -show a considerable decline; but the averages are -maintained through the advances gained by those -affluent mechanics, the plumbers; by the stone-cutters, -and by the better-paid wage-earners of the -railroads,—conductors, engineers, and firemen. With -the increase of railroad traffic the hours of labor -have been extended; and the increase of wages follows, -at least for the engineers and firemen, as a consequence -of longer hours. As for the common -laborer, he is being left behind in the race. His -wages were less in 1898 than in 1882 in six of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_68" id="Page_68">[68]</a></span> -ten cites quoted, and in four of them there was no -change.</p> - -<p>All wage-statistics are questionable, and particularly -the more generalized wage-statements which -proceed from Washington, during the fall months of -election years. A look into the figures themselves -is usually fatal to the optimism voiced in the generalizations. -From other sources the conflict of figures -is puzzling and irritating. It may be shown by selections -from these that wages are rising, that they are -falling, or that they are stationary. There is always -a disparity between the figures of the State bureaus, -the National bureau, and the census, and usually it -is a disparity that cannot be harmonized.</p> - -<p>The national census figures ought to be, as most -persons will declare, a sufficiently correct guide. -According to the last census, the number of wage-earners -in manufacturing pursuits has increased in -ten years 25.2 per cent, wages have increased 23.2 -per cent. Despite the acknowledged increase in the -country’s wealth, wages, if the census is correct, have -declined. It is officially explained, however, that -these figures are not to be taken too literally. The -schedules for 1890 included among wage-earners, -“overseers, foremen, and certain superintendents -(not general superintendents or managers), while the -census of 1900 separates from the wage-earning class -such salaried employees as general superintendents, -clerks, and salesmen.” “It is possible and probable,” -says each of the reports on manufactures, “that -this change in the form of the question has resulted -in eliminating from the wage-earners, as reported by<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_69" id="Page_69">[69]</a></span> -the present census, many high-salaried employees -included in that group for the census of 1890.”</p> - -<p>Possibly and probably. But aside from the fact -that the elimination of the comparatively few overseers -and foremen, with their somewhat higher salaries, -could make but slight influence on averages in -the tremendous total of 5,321,087 wage-earners, with -$2,330,275,021 of wages, there is another point or two -to consider. According to Part I (page 14 <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">et seq.</i>) -of the Report of Manufacturing Industries for the -census of 1890, it appears that wages underwent a -considerable inflation in that record. The questions -asked in 1880, it would appear, resulted in reporting -more wage-earners than there really were. The -questions for 1890, it is declared, produced the real -number. It is further stated that “the questions for -1890 also tended to obtain a large amount of wages -as compared with 1880.” It would seem so, indeed, -even to a neophyte in the ingenious art of figuring; -for while the wage-increase of the decade 1870-80 -could show but 22.2 per cent, that for the following -decade revealed the astonishing figure of a fraction -less than 100 per cent. When, therefore, one seeks -to compare the averages of 1890 with those of 1900 he -may not unreasonably infer that the elimination of -overseers and foremen in the later census is no more -than a set-off to the ample generosity given to the -wage-figures in the earlier census. There is no telling -for a certainty, but it is not unlikely that the present -census figures give a result approximately near -the truth.</p> - -<p>It is not an extravagant hope that some day we<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_70" id="Page_70">[70]</a></span> -shall have two successive censuses carried out on -identical schedules, so that comparisons may be accurately -made between two decades. As it is, we -must take what the powers give us, and be thankful. -We must take it on trust, moreover, for there is no -going behind the returns; and any captious questioning -of the figures can be met only in the spirit with -which Telemachus answered the fair Helen’s inquiry -if he were a true son of Ulysses. It is a matter of -faith—there is no proof.</p> - -<p>In the faith, then, that there is reasonable accuracy -in the reports, and a reasonable basis of comparison -with previous reports, it is interesting to note what is -revealed. First in point of interest is the relation of -the value of the manufactured product to the amount -of wages paid. A comparison will show whether labor -is receiving an increasing or decreasing share of the -wealth created. The census totals under the former -heading are confessedly crude, since “a constant duplication -of products appears, ... owing to the fact that -the finished products of many manufacturing establishments -become the materials of other establishments, -in which they are further utilized and again included -in the value of products.” The new census has therefore -made a separate classification of materials purchased -in a partially manufactured form. Nevertheless, -the gross total, including products from both raw -materials and partly manufactured products, is reached -by the same means as were employed in previous censuses, -and is therefore comparable with the gross -totals of previous decades. Whatever the duplications, -they are similar to those of preceding reports.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_71" id="Page_71">[71]</a></span></p> - -<p>There are nineteen States wherein the average -number of wage-earners in manufacturing pursuits -constitutes more than 6 per cent of the population. -Rhode Island heads the list with 22.5 per cent. It is -followed by Connecticut with 19.5; Massachusetts, -17.7; New Hampshire, 17.1; New Jersey, 12.8; Delaware, -12; New York, 11.7; Pennsylvania, 11.6; Maine, -10.8; Maryland, 9.1; Vermont, 8.6; Ohio, 8.3; Illinois, -8.2; Florida, 7; Wisconsin, 6.9; Michigan, 6.7; -Washington, 6.6; Indiana, 6.2; California, 6.1.</p> - -<p>In each of these States the value of the manufactured -product has increased, Florida leading with a gain of -109.6 per cent; Washington following with 107.8 per -cent; New Jersey with 72.5; Indiana, 66.7; Vermont, -50.4; Wisconsin, 45.2, and so on, Massachusetts showing -the slightest increase, 16.6 per cent. The value -of the manufactured product is of course affected by -the two items, cost of material and miscellaneous expenses, -though in turn these are almost invariably -reflected to some extent in the increase or decrease of -the value of the product. When his material and his -expenses increase, the manufacturer, if he can, puts -up the price of his product. It would be wholly impossible -to find a ratio, for the figures show an astonishing -variety. In Massachusetts, for instance,—that -classic State for the observation and study of -industrial phenomena, the State wherein statistics -are gathered with some approach to accuracy,—the -increase of miscellaneous expenses is put at 16.1 per -cent; of cost of material, at 16.8 per cent; of value of -product, 16.6 per cent. But against this reasonable -showing New York confesses to an increase of 81.8<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_72" id="Page_72">[72]</a></span> -per cent in miscellaneous expenses, with an increased -product of but 27.1 per cent. Miscellaneous expenses -increased 131 per cent in New Jersey, while the product -increased but 72.5 per cent, and Pennsylvania -and Indiana follow hard in the tracks of the two -former States. Perhaps a key to the mystery is furnished -in the enormous increase of miscellaneous -expenses in certain industries which require favorable -legislation. Gas, for instance, which is generally -considered the rightful prey of certain kinds of aldermen -and legislators, shows a payment of $8,635,399 -for “advertising, interest, insurance, repairs, and other -sundry expenses,” an increase of 74.8 per cent against -an increase in the value of the product of but 32.9 -per cent.</p> - -<p>In each of these nineteen factory States the value -of the product increased. In all but one it increased -more than 25 per cent, in two more than 100 per cent. -But in ten of these States total wages have declined, -and in three of the remainder the gain is insignificant. -Wages of men workers have declined in -eleven of these States, with a fractional gain in two -States. Florida, which shows the greatest percentage -of increase in the number of wage-earners, shows the -greatest relative loss in wages. Maine, which gives -the smallest percentage of increase in number of -wage-earners, gives the largest relative percentage -of increase in wages. The four States having the -greatest absolute number of wage-earners all show -decreases of wages. New York, with 849,092 workers, -shows a wage-loss of 2.2 per cent; Pennsylvania, with -733,834 workers, a loss of 2 per cent; Massachusetts,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_73" id="Page_73">[73]</a></span> -with 497,448, a fractional loss; and Illinois, with -395,110, 5 per cent.</p> - -<p>The specific industries for the whole nation show -similar results. Relative wages have increased in refining -petroleum, in manufacturing ice and salt, and -in a few other industries. But they have decreased -in the great majority of the industries so far reported. -There is a wage-loss in the making of bicycles, -leather gloves and mittens, watches, watch-cases, -buttons, gas, oleomargarine, boots and shoes, paper -and pulp, coke, needles and pins, cigars and cigarettes, -pocket-books, trunks and valises, leather belting -and hose, in canning and preserving fruits and vegetables, -in the tanning and finishing of leather, the -slaughtering and packing of meat, the smelting of -zinc, ship-building, car-building, the weaving of flax, -hemp, and jute, and cotton products, the brewing of -malt liquors, and newspaper publishing. All along -the monotonous rows of figures the same lesson is -generally revealed,—the productivity of the laborer -increases, the value of the product increases, the -wages, except in occasional instances, decline or -remain stationary.</p> - -<p>The important point of the purchasing power of -the dollar in 1890 as compared with 1900 needs also -to be considered. According to the exhaustive compilation -of wholesale prices published in the <cite>Bulletin</cite> -of the Department of Labor for March, 1902, the -dollar would purchase in 1890 a greater quantity of -beef, bacon, ham, corn meal, beans, cheese, eggs, -pepper, American salt, Formosa tea, hard and soft -coal, petroleum, earthenware, furniture, and glassware<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_74" id="Page_74">[74]</a></span> -than in 1900. In the latter year it would purchase -more butter, Rio coffee, dried fruits (except -currants), rice, sugar, onions, potatoes, mutton, and -fish. Wheat flour cheapened, but the price of bread -remained the same. A comparison of the two lists -on the basis of relative quantities consumed in the -average family will show the dollar to have had considerably -less purchasing power in 1900 than in 1890, -though the exact percentage is hardly computable.</p> - - -<h3>V</h3> - -<p>The new Feudalism involves not only the moderating -of the present rates of pay for men workers, but -an increase in the quantity of defenceless labor—the -labor of women and children. Census Bulletin No. -150 gives the increase in the number of men working -in manufacturing pursuits at 23.9 per cent; of women, -at 28.4 per cent; of children, at 39.5 per cent. The -wages of women have slightly increased; that is, the -increase in total wages is 30.8 per cent against an -increase in numbers of wage-earners of 28.4 per cent. -The figures are better for the children; their wages -are stated to have increased 54.4 per cent. There -are ample reasons why this should be so. Popular -agitation in behalf of the little ones may be guessed -to have had some effect in the betterment of their -pay; and a still greater effect has been wrought by -their vastly increasing productivity. The perfecting -of the instruments of production has been carried to -such a degree that many a machine may be operated -by a nursling; and it is well-nigh inevitable that<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_75" id="Page_75">[75]</a></span> -some part of this increased productivity should be -compensated for by increased pay of the operatives.</p> - -<p>The number of women in factory work in the -United States is 1,031,747, nearly one-fifth of the -total. There are 230,199 in New York, 143,109 in -Massachusetts, 126,093 in Pennsylvania, 58,978 in -Illinois, 53,711 in Ohio. Eighteen of the nineteen -factory States show an increase, Maine being the -exception; and in thirteen of these States the percentage -of gain is considerably in excess of that -of men workers. Washington leads with a gain of -151.8 per cent; Michigan and Illinois show gains of -79 per cent each; Vermont, of 63.1; Indiana, 56.4; -California, 46.8; Pennsylvania, 44.9; New Jersey, -39.3. In States outside the factory list still greater -increases are shown. The figures for South Carolina -are 158.3 percent; for North Carolina, 151.2; West -Virginia, 130.2; Alabama, 109.1; Georgia, 82.2.</p> - -<p>In specific industries the gains are sometimes -enormous. There are no women reported for coke-making, -and the number employed in making agricultural -implements has declined 25.7 per cent. -Car-building, too, shows a decline. But in refining -petroleum the 60 women wage-earners represent a -gain of 3200 per cent, and in bicycle and tricycle -making the 517 women represent a gain of 3346.7 -per cent. An increase of 2600 per cent is shown -for distilled liquors, although men workers decreased -23.8 per cent. A decrease of men workers and an -increase of women workers are also shown for clay -products, flouring and grist-mill products, chewing -and smoking tobacco and snuff, starch, cheese, butter,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_76" id="Page_76">[76]</a></span> -and condensed milk, watches, and watch-cases. The -percentage of increase is in excess of that of men -workers in oleomargarine, pocket-books, trunks and -valises, tanned, curried, and finished leather, and -needles and pins. There are six and one-half times -as many women as men in collar and cuff making, -and more than twice as many in the leather glove -and mitten industry; in the latter, moreover, the -percentage of increase for women is double that for -men. There are 37,762 women making cigars and -cigarettes, a gain of 56 per cent, against a gain of -but 4.6 per cent for men. Malt liquors show an -increase of 101.6 per cent of women workers against an -increase of 30.2 per cent of men workers. Women -have also increased in number in the cotton goods, -flax, hemp, and jute, rubber boot and shoe, glass-making, -slaughtering, and meat-packing, and boot and -shoe industries, and in newspaper publishing.</p> - -<div> -<h3>VI</h3> - -<p>There are 168,624 children employed in manufactures -throughout the country, a gain of 39.5 per -cent. Child labor has increased in twelve of the -factory States, remained practically stationary in two -(Michigan and New Hampshire), and decreased in -five States. The reasons for a decrease, where it is -observed, are not hard to find; in certain industries -child labor has been demonstrated to be unprofitable. -But wherever it has been found profitable it seems -to have been increasingly utilized. The increase in -Wisconsin is 193.5 per cent; in Washington, 103.8;<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_77" id="Page_77">[77]</a></span> -in Illinois, 92; in New Jersey, 51.4; in Pennsylvania, -47.8; and in Massachusetts, 44.9. In States outside -of the foregoing list the same tendency is shown. -South Carolina increased its child laborers by 270.7 -per cent; Alabama, by 143.8; North Carolina, 119.2; -Georgia, 81.</p> - -<p>Children number 17.5 per cent of all the factory -wage-earners of South Carolina, and 14.6 per cent of -all those of North Carolina. In five other Southern -States (including Maryland) the percentages range -from 4.3 to 7.6, while among Northern States Rhode -Island children form 5.2 per cent of the factory -wage-earners, and Pennsylvania and Wisconsin children -4.5 and 4 per cent, respectively. If Pennsylvania -is comparatively low in percentage, it is because of -the great mass of its adult workers; for in absolute -numbers of child workers it heads the list of commonwealths. -No less than 33,135 children are employed -in its factories, a figure which puts to shame -the puny showing of New York, with 13,199, and of -Massachusetts, with 12,556.</p> - -<p>In certain industries children form more than one-fourth -of all the operatives for a particular locality. -In the making of cotton goods in Alabama 29.2 per -cent of the workers are children, and in South Carolina -26.8 per cent. The figures for this industry in -North Carolina, Georgia, Virginia, and Maryland are -nearly identical. In Pennsylvania, for the making -of jute goods the figures are 26.2, and for silk and -silk goods, 20.2. Slightly more than one-fourth of -the hosiery and knit-goods workers of Georgia are -children and slightly less than one-fourth of the tobacco<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_78" id="Page_78">[78]</a></span> -workers (chewing, smoking, and snuff) of -North Carolina. Massachusetts, with its factory -law, can make but the humble showing of 6.4 per -cent of children in its cotton-goods factories, and -Rhode Island but 10.3 per cent. Glass-making is -an industry which has made a most literal adaptation -of Jesus’ invitation to little children; though, -if the words of reputable eye-witnesses are to be accepted, -it is not exactly a heaven into which they -are welcomed. Of the operatives in Pennsylvania -glass works, children number 14 per cent, and of those -in New Jersey glass works, 15.7 per cent.</p> - -<p>In the cotton-goods industry there are 39,866 children, -a gain of 70.1 per cent. It is interesting to -learn that there are 1003 children employed in ship-building, -and that this number is a gain of 476.4 per -cent over 1890. There are 4521 in boot and shoe -making, an increase of 85 per cent. There are 2259 -in flax, hemp, and jute weaving, nearly twice as many -as ten years ago. There are 316 in turpentine and -rosin making, a gain of 236.2 per cent. The number -has decreased for some reason in the making of clay -products, as has also the number of men workers, -women having now a growing preference in the potteries. -There are also fewer children in petroleum -refining, but in button-making an increase of 321.6 -per cent, in leather-glove making of 185.7 per cent, -and in slaughtering and meat-packing of 138.1 per -cent is shown. Watch-making shows a gain of 30 -per cent, bicycle-making of 780 per cent. Children -have been found comparatively unadaptable in the -liquor industry. Only 643 are employed in brewing<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_79" id="Page_79">[79]</a></span> -and 18 in distilling. For all that, these figures represent -an increase—in the former case of 24.6 per -cent, in the latter of 200 per cent.</p> - -<p>Children, according to the census, are persons below -the age of sixteen. Testimony outside of the -census reports shows the extreme youth of many -of these operatives. Investigations among the glass -works of southern New Jersey reveal a number of -cases of child workers of eight, nine, and ten years -of age. Mr. J. W. Sullivan, a careful and accurate -observer, who visited this district in July of the present -year, confirms these statements. Miss Jane -Addams, of Hull House, found a child of five working -at night in a South Carolina mill. Mrs. Irene Ashby-Macfadyen, -who has carefully studied conditions in -the Southern mills, gives many instances of extremely -young children working incredibly long hours. Professor -George Clinton Edwards, in the New York -<cite>Evening Post</cite> for August 13th, gives other instances -relating to the mills of Dallas, Tex. In a later -communication to the same journal he quotes the -statement of a mill superintendent to the effect -that of sixty boys and seventy-six girls employed, -“there are two in their tenth year, nine in their -eleventh year, thirteen in their twelfth year, and -seventeen in their fourteenth year.” “This list, from -the pay-roll,” writes Professor Edwards, “does not -include the little children, who, with the mills’ knowledge, -worked at the mills’ work, who earned the -mills’ pay in the 10 or 20 per cent increase received -by the relatives they assisted at piece work, and who -were, therefore, in fact, the mills’ employees.” Labor<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_80" id="Page_80">[80]</a></span> -Commissioner Lacey, of North Carolina, reports -7605 children under fourteen in 261 mills. A correspondent -of the Cincinnati <cite>Post</cite> estimated 400 of -the 1000 children employed in five mills in Columbia, -S.C., to be under twelve years of age. Testimony -by mill officials before a Southern legislature -acknowledged in one instance 30 per cent of child -workers under twelve years in a spinning room, and -in another 25 per cent.</p> - -<p>The census reports bear amiable testimony to the -providence of the mill-owners. “Many of the mills,” -says the South Carolina report, “have reading rooms -and libraries for their employees, and nearly all contribute -regularly to the support of the local schools.” -“In the absence of legislation regulating child labor,” -says the Georgia report, “all the cotton manufacturers -in the State have signed an agreement to exclude -from the mills children under ten years of age, and -those under twelve who cannot show a certificate of -four months’ attendance at school.” In the North -Carolina report we find, “In the absence of legislation -nearly all the mill-owners have agreed to discontinue -the employment of children under twelve years -of age.” A correspondent of the New York <cite>World</cite> -found a like benevolence among the glass employers -in southern New Jersey. “I need the boys,” said -one, “all I can do is to treat the boys as well as I -can.” The mill-owners, one and all, demand that the -State keep its hands off, and trust to their own benevolence -for remedies. So far, in the South, -despite a three years’ agitation, the matter is still -left entirely in their control.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_81" id="Page_81">[81]</a></span></p> - -<p>Criticism of the mill-owners has been made to the -effect that despite their benevolent professions, the -children are poorly paid and that they remain uneducated. -Some of them work long hours for 10 cents -a day, others for <span class="nowrap">12 <span class="fnum">1</span>/<span class="fden">2</span></span>, 15, and 18 cents. A newspaper -correspondent tells of a certain spinning room in a -Southern mill wherein the average daily pay for all -children is <span class="nowrap">23 <span class="fnum">8</span>/<span class="fden">10</span></span> cents. “I know of babies,” writes -Mrs. Macfadyen, “working for 5 and 6 cents a day.” -The schooling which a child working seventy-two hours -a week can get may be roughly guessed at. Mrs. Macfadyen -found 567 children under twelve years working -in eight mills. Only 122 of these children could read -or write. In a school in a mill-town of between 6000 -and 8000 persons, the same investigator found an -enrolment of 90 pupils divided into two classes. A -visit to one of these classes disclosed 22 children, only -12 of whom were mill-workers’ children, and 10 had -worked in the mills from one to three years.</p> - -<p>Criticisms based on these data are, however, generally -held to be sentimental and irrelevant. Glass-blowing -or textile-weaving, like anthracite mining, is, -in the sententious phrase of President George F. Baer, -of the Philadelphia and Reading Railway Company, -“a business, and not a religious, sentimental, or -academic proposition.” It is conducted for the making -of money, and not for the spiritual or hygienic -welfare of the operatives. It would be well, say the -employers, if things could be better. But for the -present they are making all the contribution to that -end that they feel can conveniently be made. Moreover, -they contend—and they are supported generally<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_82" id="Page_82">[82]</a></span> -by the local ministers, who have in charge the spiritual -affairs of the populace; by the local editors, lawyers, -and solid men of “business”—it is better that children -should work in the mills and factories than “run -about the streets.” As for education, the contributing -employers point to the schools, as though to say, -“Here are the opportunities; why do you not take -advantage of them?” It is quite enough to provide a -balky horse with water, without being morally obliged -to make him drink.</p> - -<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTE:</h3> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_4_4" id="Footnote_4_4"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_4"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> Since the publication of the <cite>Independent</cite> article the author’s attention -has been called to an address entitled “The New Feudalism,” -delivered by Mr. Benjamin A. Richmond, of Cumberland, Md., -before the Maryland Bar Association in July, 1898. The author had -never seen or heard of this address. It is written from a legal standpoint, -and both the matter and the treatment are widely different from -the matter and manner of the <cite>Independent</cite> article. But whatever the -differences, the same general idea is to be found in both papers, and -it is only just that acknowledgment should be made of Mr. Richmond’s -priority.</p></div></div> -</div> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"></div><!--Page break for ePub--> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_83" id="Page_83">[83]</a></span></p> - - - - -<h2>CHAPTER V<br /> -<span class="titlefont smcap">Our Makers of Law</span></h2> - - -<p>The dual responsibility which our lawmakers and -judges bear, on the one hand to the people, and on -the other to the Big Men, produces a chaos of conflicting -laws and decisions. For the chartering of -business corporations we have the “Delaware theory,” -which seems to be to give the applicant whatever he -asks for; the “New Jersey theory,” which is a slight -modification of the former; and the “Massachusetts -theory,” which reserves to the State a certain measure -of supervision and control. For the fixing of employers’ -liability for injuries to workmen we have a -wide range of precedents, from States which hold to -the common-law doctrine that practically frees the -employer from blame, to those which fix a liability in -somewhat definite terms. Factory legislation, regulations -for the public health, the determination of a -legal workday, the restraining of corporate aggressiveness—these -and a score of like questions are -variously passed upon or deliberately avoided in the -several States. Judicial decisions, too, present a -spectacle of the widest diversity.</p> - -<p>Nevertheless this chaos shows signs of a gradual -reduction to order. The insistent challenge, “Under -which king, Bezonian, speak or die!” which perpetually<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_84" id="Page_84">[84]</a></span> -assails all of our legislative and judicial functionaries, -sooner or later forces a decision, and naturally -it is the stronger rival that wins. How effective is -this challenge, how strong is the pressure, Mr. John -Jay Chapman has strikingly shown in his “Causes -and Consequences,” and the instances that crop out -from time to time, like that of the recent tampering -with the Supreme Court of Missouri, reveal only a -needless confirmation of a known truth. Legislation -in behalf of the general welfare and of the industrially -dependent classes becomes less frequent and more -guarded; and judicial decisions in matters that involve -class antagonisms are more frequently given to the -dominant class.</p> - - -<h3>I</h3> - -<p>A marked tendency of recent legislation is that -toward giving increased powers to municipal officials. -Another is that toward the creation of boards charged -with administrative, executive, semi-judicial, and even -police powers. The institution of these boards means -simply a further removal from the people of the conduct -of public affairs. Mr. Leonard A. Blue, in the -<cite>Annals of the American Academy</cite> for November, 1901, -gives an interesting view of the subject. “These -boards,” he writes, “are practically irresponsible -bodies. They are beyond the control of the people, -or of any one who is responsible to the people for -their actions. Appointed as they are for definite -terms of office, they cannot be removed during that -term except after an investigation which amounts to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_85" id="Page_85">[85]</a></span> -an impeachment. The Governor who appoints them -in many cases can only appoint a single member, the -terms of the others extending beyond his own, so -that he can neither mould the policy of the board nor -can he be held responsible for it.” And he quotes -from one of the messages of the Hon. W. E. Russell, -Governor of Massachusetts (1891-93), these words: -“The people of the State might have a most decided -opinion about the management and work of the departments, -and give emphatic expression to that -opinion, and yet be unable to control their action. -The system gives great power without proper responsibility, -and tends to remove the people’s government -from the people’s control.” Irresponsible to both the -people and the people’s officials as they are, these -boards are yet not wholly unsusceptible to outside -pressure; they are, as is well known, peculiarly liable -to the influence of the Big Men.</p> - - -<h3>II</h3> - -<p>While legislation moves rapidly enough in the direction -of detaching political powers from the people, -it shows a growing disinclination to meddle with -affairs between magnate and minion. Twelve or -fifteen years ago, in certain sections, “labor” legislation -had a flourishing career. The number of laws -so classified, passed in a single three-year period in -New York State, made a record for all time. Labor -was then rapidly combining, and its lusty organizations -made emphatic demands for protective laws. -A Democratic Governor, not wholly regardless of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_86" id="Page_86">[86]</a></span> -hopes of the Presidential succession, for the time -allied himself with the movement and secured the -passage of many of these measures. With an alacrity -much greater than that with which the Constitution -follows the flag, judicial decisions in those days tended -to follow the general policy of the party in power, -and thus but slight trouble was experienced in securing -constitutional sanction.</p> - -<p>Other States followed, and for several years the -astonishment and indignation of the Big Men were -intermittently roused by the spectacle of Jacobinical -legislators meddling in affairs outside their province. -Mr. F. J. Stimson, in the <cite>Atlantic Monthly</cite> for -November, 1897, informs us that in the ten preceding -years 1639 laws relating to labor had been passed in -the various States and Territories. This is an average -of 3.4 a year for each legislature, though the -courts had modified the average somewhat by declaring -114 of these measures unconstitutional. Doubtless -among those that escaped the “killing decree” -of the courts were a number that benefited the worker, -though it is doubtful if any of them served to modify -his economic status.</p> - -<p>However that may be, it is unquestioned that the -tendency toward the enactment of this sort of legislation -has suffered a decline. It is hard to fix the -point of culmination, though probably it lies somewhere -about the years 1896-97. In isolated instances, -and under peculiar circumstances, it is conceded there -is an occasional revival. The Pennsylvania legislature -of 1897 showed a remarkable zeal, shortening -the workday of women and minors, limiting child<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_87" id="Page_87">[87]</a></span> -labor, establishing a bureau of mines, and making -other regulations. Maryland, in 1898, imposed certain -mining regulations and required seats in stores -for women workers. Virginia and Massachusetts, in -the same year, interfered slightly, the former with -an arbitration act. In the spring of 1899, Kansas, -Illinois, Colorado, Indiana, Michigan, Nebraska, -Washington, and Wisconsin, all addressed themselves -more or less earnestly to the redress of certain grievances; -and they were followed by Iowa in 1900, by -Massachusetts again in the same year, and by Alabama -in 1901. In the present year New York, after -five years of agitation, reluctantly granted a moderately -expressed employers’ liability law.</p> - -<p>Most of this legislation, however, was enacted in -the newer States, and served only to push them along -toward the standard set in the older States in earlier -years. Advances of any sort are difficult to discover. -As for the year 1901, the record of progressive legislation -is almost bare. Congress suppressed the Eight-hour, -Anti-injunction, and Prison-labor bills, and mutilated -the Chinese bill. A convention of the National -Association of Railway Commissioners, comprising -representatives from twenty-five State boards and -from the Interstate Commerce Commission, petitioned -Congress, in June, 1901, to enact a number of measures -regarding railway traffic; but our lawmakers -appear to have been too busy with other matters. -Factory legislation has suffered a relapse in all of -the States. “The statutes of 1901,” euphemistically -writes Mr. Horace G. Wadlin, in the New York State -Library’s “Review of Legislation, 1901,” “which<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_88" id="Page_88">[88]</a></span> -may be classed as protective legislation, intended -to safeguard the workman in his employment or to -secure to him his wages, are neither very numerous -nor very radical.” Something better, however, as -Mr. Adna F. Weber points out in the same volume, -was done in regard to shorter workdays. California -passed an Eight-hour law for State work; Minnesota, -with certain liberal exceptions, another; while Utah -penalized infractions of an existing law. Even Pennsylvania, -generally so sensitive in the matter of interfering -with the rights of her workers to employ -themselves in any manner they are constrained to -choose, made the daring innovation of prohibiting a -longer workday than twelve hours for women and -minors in bakeries. Doubtless the lesson to be -learned from this is a growing inclination toward the -gospel of relaxation, which Mr. Herbert Spencer so -emphatically invoked on his visit here twenty years -ago. An industrial Feudalism is not inconsistent -with a moderate workday, and it is not unlikely that -some further experiments in this line may be made.</p> - - -<h3>III</h3> - -<p>An average man, not overlearned in political -science, and not too well acquainted with the ways -and means of politicians, might naturally suppose -that the result of something more than 1639 “labor” -laws would be an almost revolutionary change in the -conditions of industry. He might suppose a general -effect comprising these particulars: the securing of -safe places and safe conditions for toil; the utmost<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_89" id="Page_89">[89]</a></span> -safeguarding against accidents; the fixing of liability -for injuries or death suffered in the service of a -master; the guarantee of the right of workmen to -combine, to leave their work for causes sufficient to -themselves, and peaceably to persuade others to do -so; the guarantee of protection from blacklisting by -employers, and the framing of all such laws in a -spirit so sincere and in diction so definite that judicial -discretion would be reduced to a minimum.</p> - -<p>“Labor” legislation, however, takes on too much -a form and pressure due to influences from above to -confirm even this temperate supposition. It is somewhat -presumptuous, and in a later time will be grossly -impious, for a layman not of the seigniorial class to -speak querulously on so sacred a subject; yet it -needs must be said that the mass of the measures so -far framed have proceeded but little beyond the confines -of the common law. Many of them, indeed, are -mere enactments into statute of that elastic, not to say -elusive, body of precedent. The common law comes -down to us from distant times, when other conditions -prevailed, and throughout all of it which bears on the -relations of master and servant there runs a principle -based on an unsupported theory. “This theory,” -writes Mr. George W. Alger, a member of the New -York Bar, in the <cite>American Journal of Sociology</cite> for -November, 1900, “resolutely closed its eyes to common, -obvious, social and economic distinctions between -men, either considered as individuals or as -classes, and with a self-imposed blindness imagined -rather than saw the servant and his master acting -upon a plane of absolute and ideal equality in all<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_90" id="Page_90">[90]</a></span> -matters touching their contractual relation; both -were free and equal, and the proper function of government -was to let them alone. If the servant was -dissatisfied with the conditions of his employment; -if the dangers created not merely by the necessities -of the work, but by the master’s indifference to the -safety of his men, were in the eyes of the latter too -great to be endured with prudence, then, being under -this theory a ‘free agent’ to go or to stay, if he chose -to stay he must take the possible consequences of -personal injury or death.”</p> - -<p>Under the common law, it is true, the employer is -presumed to have certain duties toward his workmen. -As interpreted by Mr. Stephen D. Fessenden, LL.M., -in the <cite>Bulletin</cite> of the Department of Labor, for November, -1900, these obligations are as follows:—</p> - -<p>“An employer assumes the duty toward his employee -of exercising reasonable care and diligence to -provide the employee with a reasonably safe place at -which to work; with reasonably safe machinery, tools, -and implements to work with; with reasonably safe -materials to work upon, and with suitable and competent -fellow-servants to work with him; and, in case -of a dangerous or complicated business, to make such -reasonable rules for its conduct as may be proper to -protect the servants employed therein.”</p> - -<p>This common-law doctrine is, however, very seriously -qualified by the doctrine of the workman’s -assumption of risk, of his contributory negligence, -and of negligence on the part of a fellow-servant. -Each of the terms in this doctrinal trinity is of expansive -elasticity, and even the constituent words of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_91" id="Page_91">[91]</a></span> -each term may be variously interpreted. So that a -workman forced to earn his bread where he can, in -the face of constant perils, literally takes his life in -his hands. If injured, there may be set up and sustained -against his claim for damages the plea of free -and unconstrained assumption, or of contributory -negligence, or of negligence of another workman, -even though the latter may be a superior who orders -the victim to his dangerous task.</p> - -<p>“It is a well-settled principle of common law,” -writes Mr. Fessenden, “that where ... duties [of -employers] are imposed by legislative enactment or -municipal ordinance, it is negligence on the part of -the employer to fail to comply with [these] requirements.” -Now it happens that the United States, -twenty States, the District of Columbia (by act of -Congress), and one Territory have enacted this common-law -principle into statute, affixing it to certain -regulations of industry. Yet in such manner are -the greater number of these statutes drawn that it is -often found possible to evade them on the score of -one or more of the terms in the common-law theory. -The record of decisions on these statutes is at best -conflicting and confusing. But enough can be shown -to illustrate the frequent futility of the laws to secure -either employers’ compliance with imposed duties or -employers’ liability for injuries due to negligence. -The Ohio Supreme Court, in 1895, held that “one -cannot maintain an action against his employer for -an injury following a violation of the act regulating -coal mines, unless at the time he was injured he was -in the exercise of due care; that one who voluntarily<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_92" id="Page_92">[92]</a></span> -assumes a risk thereby waives the provisions of a -statute made for his protection.” The Wisconsin -Supreme Court decided that the law (1889) requiring -the guarding or blocking of railway frogs “does not -take away the defence of contributory negligence.” -The New York Court of Appeals in the case of -Knisley <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">vs.</i> Pratt (148 N. Y. 372) decided that to -hold that the workman could not waive his master’s -statutory duty by continuing at work was “a new and -startling doctrine calculated to establish a measure of -liability unknown to the common law.”</p> - -<p>Statute law is presumed to replace common law -and to redress the inequities resulting from the application -of old principles to changed conditions. But -the redress of inequities is conspicuously wanting in -much of the so-called “protective” legislation. It is -impossible to guess whether on the one hand in legislative -indifference or unwisdom, or on the other -hand in judicial interestedness and overwisdom, lies -the greater cause of these statutory failures. Some -added speculations on the subject will be found further -along. But whatever the attitude of the judges, that -of the lawmakers reveals a chronic and now intensifying -fear of disturbing the sacred privileges of -“business.”</p> - -<p>The contractual waiving, by the employee, of the -employer’s negligence, is a subject about which a -number of legislatures have concerned themselves. -Two States (Georgia and Massachusetts), according -to Mr. Fessenden, have forbidden such waivers generally, -one State (Ohio) has declared void such contracts -when made by employees, and twelve States<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_93" id="Page_93">[93]</a></span> -and one Territory have forbidden such waivers where -the liability is imposed by statute. The Ohio law, -however, was declared unconstitutional by the United -States Circuit Court for the Northern District of Ohio -in 1896 on the ground that “in denying to the employees -of a railroad corporation the right to make -their own contracts concerning their own labor, [it] -is depriving them of ‘liberty’ and of the right to -exercise the privileges of manhood, ‘without due -process of law’;” and furthermore that it was class -legislation. Each of these laws, moreover, can be -practically nullified, as the courts have repeatedly -held. An employer may organize a relief organization -for the payment of benefits. He may tax his -employees for a greater or less part of the expenses -of the department. He may then make employment -conditional upon the workman’s joining the association -and signing a pledge agreeing, in consideration -of the payment of the regular benefits, to release the -employer from all claims for injuries. Such contracts -are valid, since, according to the ingenious interpretation -of the courts, they do not waive damages, but -choose between two sources of compensation. Only -one State (Iowa) has had the temerity to declare this -practice illegal, and in view of the action of the -courts the law will probably be held to be unconstitutional.</p> - -<p>Statutory provisions against accidents to workmen -reveal quite as much timidity as do provisions regarding -employers’ liability. The yearly number of accidents -in our industries is unknown, and can be only -roughly guessed at. The investigation of the New<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_94" id="Page_94">[94]</a></span> -York Commissioner of Labor, in the spring of 1899, -would indicate a yearly average of 14,576 accidents -for factory workers alone in one State. In the Pennsylvania -anthracite mines more than 400 persons are -killed every year, and in the bituminous mines of the -same State the yearly average for the period 1895-98 -was 171 killed and 421 injured. An official report -made to the United States Geological Survey -in September gives the record of lives lost in mining -coal for the year 1901 as 1467, and the number of -workmen injured as 3643. In the anthracite mines -of Pennsylvania 513 men were killed and 1243 injured, -and in the bituminous fields of the same State -301 were killed and 656 injured. The railroads provide -a yearly Gettysburg, with some 40,000 casualties -to workmen alone; and many an industry annually -furnishes its humble Bull Run or Fort Donelson.</p> - -<p>Regulations, however, proceed cautiously, not to -say haltingly; they are generally tame regulations, -they are frequently disobeyed, and their effect on -the casualty rate is anything but radical. Though -for 1901 the increased use of safety appliances lessened -the percentage of coupling accidents on railroads, -the percentage actually increased for 1898, -1899, and 1900. Since 1898 there has been an -increase in the rate of accidents in coal mining, and -doubtless, also, if the figures were known, an increase -could be shown for factories and workshops.</p> - -<p>Although twenty-one States, according to Mr. -William F. Willoughby, in the <cite>Bulletin</cite> for January, -1901, provide for an inspection service in factories, -only thirteen impose specific provisions making it<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_95" id="Page_95">[95]</a></span> -obligatory upon factory and mill owners to take certain -precautions against accidents. Only one of -these laws, moreover,—that of Ohio,—may fairly -be called an adequate and definitely expressed statute. -There are but five States that have enacted laws “the -purpose of which is to make it obligatory upon -directors of building and construction work to take -certain precautions against accidents,” and only -one of these (New York) has given the measure an -adequate comprehensiveness. Twenty-three States -have more or less elaborate mining regulations; but -as compliance with these laws is usually left to the -honor and benevolence of the mine owner, and as -mining accidents continue at a practically static rate, -it is hard to see the beneficial result. Some of the -States compel railroads to block or guard frogs, and -several have laws independent of the Federal statute -of 1893, requiring the use of automatic couplers and -power brakes. The former may be evaded, however; -and, in the absence of statute imposing liability, the -evasion counts for nothing in behalf of an injured -workman’s claim for damages. The effect on the -accident rates has already been mentioned.</p> - -<p>Dr. Sarah S. Whittelsey’s paper in the <cite>Annals of -the American Academy</cite> for July, 1902, summarizes -the report of the Industrial Commission on the -results of factory legislation in the various States. -From this it appears that only about half the States -have passed what may be called factory acts, many -of which are mere fire-escape provisions, and that -there are almost no factory acts in the South, nor in -the more distinctly agricultural States of the West.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_96" id="Page_96">[96]</a></span> -New Hampshire, Vermont, Nebraska, and California -generously permit the employment in factories of -children ten years old; seven States put the limit -at twelve years, two at thirteen, ten at fourteen, and -one makes the limit fourteen years for girls and twelve -years for boys. Working hours have been more or -less regulated for women and minors in fifteen States, -and for minors alone in nine States. Courts in three -States, however, have declared acts regulating working -hours of women unconstitutional. In sixteen -States, three Territories, and the District of Columbia -there is absolutely no limitation for persons of any -age or sex. Aside from certain occasional acts relating -to the payment of wages, to inspection, and to -employers’ liability, this is a complete summary of -protective legislation concerning the industries that -employ 5,321,087 of the Nation’s wage-earners.</p> - -<p>Mr. Fessenden gives a summary of the laws for the -protection of workmen in their employment, in the -<cite>Bulletin</cite> for January, 1900. The most timid conservative -may read it with relief, for any fears of an undue -lodgment of power in the working classes will be -effectually banished by its perusal. Only nine States -have gone so far as to enact into statute the supposed -common-law principle that combinations of workmen, -formed for the purpose of seeking increase of wages -and betterment of conditions, are not of themselves -unlawful. Four others specify that the provisions of -their “anti-trust” acts do not apply to combinations -of labor. On the other hand, the anti-conspiracy -laws of eleven States are capable of interpretation -which would penalize many of the peaceable methods<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_97" id="Page_97">[97]</a></span> -of labor societies, and such interpretations have been -frequently made.</p> - -<p>Moreover, the wording of Sections 3995 and 5440 -of the Federal Revised Statutes, chapters 647 of the -Anti-trust act, and 104 of the Interstate Commerce -act, and the amendment of 1889 to the latter, are -capable of interpretation to the effect that collective -quitting of work on railways is illegal. Decisions to -that effect have several times been made in the -United States courts. “A strike, or a preconcerted -quitting of work,” reads the decision in United States -<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">vs.</i> Cassidy (1895) before the District Court of the -United States for the Northern District of California, -“by a combination of railroad employees, is in itself -unlawful, if the concerted action is knowingly and -wilfully directed by the parties to it for the purpose -of obstructing and retarding the passage of the mails, -or in restraint of trade and commerce among the -States.” “It will be practically impossible hereafter,” -reads the United States Circuit Court decision in the -case of Waterhouse <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">et al. vs.</i> Cromer (1893), “for a -body of men to combine to hinder and delay the work -of the transportation company without becoming -amenable to the provisions of these statutes.” The -indefinite diction of many of the State laws against -“intimidation and coercion” also gives wide scope to -judicial discretion, and permits the occasional naming -of the most innocuous acts as “coercion.”</p> - -<p>The necessity of peace in an industrial society is -everywhere recognized; and it is, therefore, not surprising -that really earnest efforts have been made in -behalf of arbitration. It obtained, in a measure, during<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_98" id="Page_98">[98]</a></span> -the older Feudalism, through the “courts baron,” -which considered tenantry and wage-questions; and -it is becoming more common day by day. Within -sixteen years twenty-one States and the United States -have passed more or less effective measures looking -to its use in labor disputes. Political coercion is also -a matter that has won a large share of legislative -attention; twenty-nine States and two Territories -have enacted laws regarding it. There is, however, -an important distinction to be made. In an ordinary -conflict of political issues, when the magnates and -their retainers are to be found in both parties, it is -obvious confusion and the unsettling of political conditions -for the employers to dictate how their workmen -shall vote. But when political issues suggest a -class conflict, as in 1896, some of the provisions of -these laws are by common consent waived. The -humble toiler may vote as he likes on the immaterial -questions of ordinary campaigns; but on questions -having to do with the salvation of society and the -preservation of the hallowed code of “business,” instruction -and even gentle pressure become the solemn -duty of his social betters. There are fewer laws, it -may be observed, regarding another kind of coercion. -Discharges on account of membership in a labor -union are forbidden in but fifteen states; and in two -of these (Illinois and Missouri) such provisions -have been found, after much painstaking study, to be -unconstitutional. The discovery is considered a most -happy one; and according to the injunction of the -Federal Constitution, that “full faith and credit shall -be given in each State to the public acts, records, and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_99" id="Page_99">[99]</a></span> -judicial proceedings of every other State,” the ruling -will no doubt be found applicable in a number of the -other commonwealths.</p> - - -<h3>IV</h3> - -<p>Our lawmakers are not to be blamed for decisions -of unconstitutionality. Rather, they are to be congratulated. -For the recent tendency of the judges -to determine for themselves what shall be enacted -into law has developed new refuges for the lawmakers. -We have now Solon, the legislator, and Rhadamanthus, -the judge, in new rôles—the rôles of the -good and bad partner of Dickens’s novel. To the -humble voter, when the pressure from below conflicts -with the pressure from above, Solon is now able to -stand as the supporter of popular measures, and to -throw upon the less responsible Rhadamanthus the -onus of declaring them bad law. The fury of the -magnate at Solon’s demagogy is mitigated, if not extinguished, -when he considers the difficulties of the -lawmaker’s position, and especially by the further -consideration that Rhadamanthus has the final word -to say. Solon has other refuges, it is true; and sometimes -these must be availed of, for it is not always certain -that a projected popular measure can be declared -unconstitutional. For several years it had been considered -possible, for instance, that an employers’ liability -act, if passed in New York, would stand the -test of the courts. It became the custom, therefore, -when an adequate measure on this subject was introduced, -for the adverse interests to introduce a conflicting<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_100" id="Page_100">[100]</a></span> -bill. The ingenious lawmaker thereupon -regretfully found a divided public sentiment, and as -a consequence no bill was passed. There are no -reasons at hand for accounting for the fact that at the -last session of the Albany legislature such a measure -was actually enacted.</p> - - -<h3>V</h3> - -<p>How far our legislators are enabled to withstand -public sentiment, no matter how strongly based in -reason and how definite in objective, may be instanced -in the attitude of Congress regarding the Safety-appliance -act of 1893. Agitation for this measure -had grown to such an extent that action could no -longer be delayed. But though action on the bill -could not be delayed, the terms of fulfilment of the -bill could be postponed to a comparatively remote -period. The number of railway employees killed in -the year ended June 30, 1893, was 2727, a number -exceeding the Union death roll in every battle of the -Civil War except Gettysburg, and within 243 of that -record. In the same year the number of wounded -(31,729) was more than three times as great as the -number of Union wounded at either Antietam or -Chancellorsville, and more than double that at Gettysburg. -Yet despite this tremendous carnage, the -legislators, wavering between the public demands -and the demands of the magnates, though they -passed the bill, generously granted five years for its -complete observance, and then gave the Interstate -Commerce Commission the power to grant further<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_101" id="Page_101">[101]</a></span> -delays—in effect giving seven years for its fulfilment. -In those seven years 13,906 employees were -killed—a loss exceeding the Union death roll at -Gettysburg, Spottsylvania, the Wilderness, Antietam, -Chancellorsville and Chickamauga combined—and -approximately 220,000 were wounded, or more than -three times the number of Union wounded in those -six battles. That a great part of this casualty record -was avoidable is evidenced in the August report of -the Interstate Commerce Commission, which shows -that the number of employees killed in coupling -accidents in the year ended June 30, 1901, declined -from 282 to 198, and the number injured from 5229 -to 2768. It was in 1893 that this generous latitude -was granted the magnates. Were the occasion to -arise now, it is probable that the term of grace would -number fourteen years instead of seven.</p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"></div><!--Page break for ePub--> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_102" id="Page_102">[102]</a></span></p> - - - - -<h2>CHAPTER VI<br /> -<span class="titlefont smcap">Our Interpreters of Law</span></h2> - - -<p>The attitude of the judiciary in matters involving -class antagonisms is a subject upon which only the -most restrained language is tolerable. Even general -inferences which suggest such a thing as judicial -bias must be avoided. Faith in the rectitude and -wisdom of our judges is a virtue sedulously preached,—perhaps -most insistently by those who do most -toward their corruption,—and though the virtue as -we know it is rather vocal than immanent, it is -sufficiently deep-seated to be intolerant of spoken -heresy. Were it openly questioned by any considerable -body of citizens, the foolhardy persons would -soon bring down upon themselves the rallying onslaught -of those heterogeneous elements which Karl -Marx somewhat extravagantly pictured, “landlords -and capitalists, stock-exchange wolves and shopkeepers, -protectionists and free-traders, government -and opposition, priests and freethinkers, young street-walkers -and old nuns—under the common cry for -the salvation of property, religion, the family, and -society.” Such heretics might have all the certainty -of Paul, “that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully,” -and yet it would be a parlous thing to be<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_103" id="Page_103">[103]</a></span> -openly sceptical of the assumption that it is always -lawfully used.</p> - -<p>But at least one may, without attainder of anarchy, -assemble and classify certain instances, and point out -their coincidences and their contrarieties. There is, -for example, a notable sameness in kind of the laws -which are declared unconstitutional. There is, to -utter it mildly, a vast preponderance in the number -of injunctions against striking, boycotting, and agitating -over the number against locking-out, blacklisting, -and the employment of armed mercenaries. -There is a practical, though not an entire, unanimity -against the awarding of damages to injured employees, -whether the decision be based on common or statute -law; and, finally, there is a considerable diversity -between the decisions usually rendered by judges -elected for short terms, and therefore directly responsible -to the people, and those rendered by the less -responsible judges, elected for long terms or appointed.</p> - - -<h3>I</h3> - -<p>The legislative aspects of employers’ liability have -already been considered. Certain judicial aspects of -the matter need also to be touched upon. The question -is one of grave social import. The worker no -longer owns his tools, but must use the machinery -provided for him. A certain element of danger inheres -in the operation of probably all machinery; -but when old, defective, or with its dangerous parts -unguarded, injuries to its operatives are well-nigh -certain. Yet for such injuries, with their awful consequences<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_104" id="Page_104">[104]</a></span> -to the operative and his dependent ones, -there is generally no redress, except in a few States -where statutes have fixed the matter of liability in set -terms which leave no room for judicial discretion.</p> - -<p>Under the common law the workman is held to -assume the risk attending his employment. He is a -free agent—so the legal fiction runs—and if afraid -of injury need not work. Common law also presupposes -the providing of a “reasonably safe” place -and “reasonably safe” machinery by the employer. -It would be difficult to determine, however, from the -mass of decisions under the common law, what is -meant by “reasonably safe.” A Colorado lower -court gave damages to the mother of a miner killed -by falling rock while removing débris from one of -the mines of the Moon-Anchor Consolidated Gold -Mines, Limited. The case came finally to the United -States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth District, -and the judgment was reversed, Judges Sanborn -and Adams concurring and Judge Thayer dissenting. -The work was admittedly hazardous; in the opinion -of Judge Thayer “the place was needlessly made -unsafe by the master’s negligence.” The concurring -judges, however, decided that the company’s negligence -was not responsible, and that “the deceased of -his own free will determined to cope with these risks -and hazards.... In this, his own voluntary conduct, -is found the intervening, proximate, and responsible -cause of his injury.” (111 Federal Reporter, -298.)</p> - -<p>Even when the employer assures the workman of -the safety of a machine, the risk is still, according to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_105" id="Page_105">[105]</a></span> -many decisions, the workman’s. The Circuit Court -of Shiawassee County, Michigan, refused to award -damages to a workman for injuries sustained from -a defective machine which he was operating for his -employer. The case went to the Supreme Court on -a writ of error, and on December 15, 1900, that court -affirmed the previous judgment. It had been shown -that the plaintiff warned his employer of the danger -of the machine, and that the employer gave assurances -to the contrary. Nevertheless, in the words of Judge -Moon (Moore?), “one cannot continue to operate -a machine which he knows is dangerous simply upon -the assurance of his employer that it is not, if he has -just as much knowledge of the danger arising from -the operation of the machine as the principal has -[without assuming the risk].” (82 N. W. Reporter, -1797.)</p> - -<p>The decision, read by Judge McLennan, in the -recent case of Rice <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">vs.</i> the Eureka Paper Company -(76 App. Div. 336) before the Fourth Appellate -Division of New York State, would seem to indicate -that the burden of risk is not to be shifted from the -workman even when his employer acknowledges a -defect in machinery and promises to remedy it. -There is some doubt, however, if such a decision, -though valid in many States, will stand in the State -where it was given; for the Court of Appeals has -several times decided that liability follows from an -acknowledgment of defective machinery. On the -other hand, this highest court of New York State -has won the distinction of carrying the doctrine of -assumption of risk to an extreme degree. The case<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_106" id="Page_106">[106]</a></span> -of Gabrielson <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">vs.</i> Waydell (135 N. Y. 1) involved -the question of the liability of the owners of a maritime -vessel for injuries suffered by a sailor in their -employ. The captain of the vessel had committed a -confessedly unprovoked and particularly brutal assault -upon the sailor, who had subsequently sued the owner -for damages. The court decided that the sailor had -no redress; that “the misconduct of the captain was -a risk assumed by the seaman, for the consequences -of which the owners are not responsible.”</p> - -<p>A fact more curious yet to the unlegal mind is the -judicial contention, instanced in the previous chapter, -that statutory provisions for the safeguarding of machinery -may be waived by the workman. Evidently -his burden of risk, like the Hindu’s caste, is born -with him, and cannot be laid aside or escaped. The -case of the E. S. Higgins Carpet Company <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">vs.</i> -O’Keefe (79 Federal Reporter, 900) is an illustration. -Damages for an injury received from an unguarded -machine had been given a fifteen-year-old boy in the -United States Circuit Court for the Southern District -of New York. The United States Circuit Court of -Appeals for the Second Circuit, however, reversed the -judgment. The plaintiff was a minor, but this fact -was held to have no bearing. “We think the circumstance -that he was a minor of no importance,” -read the decision of Judge Wallace. “The rules -which govern actions for negligence in the case of -children of tender years do not apply to minors who -have attained years of discretion.” The New York -factory act required guards for this particular kind -of machine. But that, also, was immaterial. “The<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_107" id="Page_107">[107]</a></span> -provisions of the statute ... requiring cogs to be -properly guarded, have no application to the case, -except as regards the question of the negligence of -the defendant. As construed by the highest courts -of the State, the statute does not impose any liability -upon an employer for injuries received by a minor in -his service in consequence of the fault of the employee, -or arising from the obvious risks of the service he -has undertaken to perform.” To clinch the matter, -Judge Wallace cited the then recent case of Graves -<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">vs.</i> Brewer before the Fourth Appellate Division of -New York State, wherein the court held that “the -liability of the employer was not changed by reason -of the factory act requiring cog-wheels to be covered, -because such protection could be waived and was -waived by a person accepting employment upon the -machine with the cogs in an unguarded condition, as -the danger was apparent, and one of the obvious risks -of the employment.” The case of Knisley <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">vs.</i> Pratt -(148 N. Y. 372) before the New York Court of Appeals -was decided in the same way, and also the case -of White <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">vs.</i> Witteman Lithographic Company. In -the latter case the plaintiff was a child of fourteen.</p> - -<p>Such decisions are common in more States than -one. Another case which may prove of some interest -to the lay mind is that of Gillen <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">vs.</i> the Patten and -Sherman Railroad Company (44 Atlantic Reporter, -361). The plaintiff, while uncoupling cars, had -his foot crushed in an unfilled frog, and had been -awarded damages. A motion for a new trial was -argued before the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, -and was granted. The decision, delivered by Judge<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_108" id="Page_108">[108]</a></span> -Lucilius A. Emery, acknowledged the existence of a -statute (chapter 216 of 1889) requiring the filling or -blocking of guard rails or frogs on all railways before -January 1, 1890. It held, however, that such filling -and blocking was not immediately mandatory upon -a railroad constructed after that date. “Such company -is entitled to a reasonable time for compliance -with that statute.” It was at a crossing of such a -railway that the trainman lost his foot. He had no -right to assume that the rails were blocked, merely -because a statute said they should be. The brakeman, -therefore, assumed the risk, and he also furnished -contributory negligence, since “to move about -over frogs and switches while coupling and uncoupling -cars, even in moving trains, without taking any -thought of the frogs and guard rails, or as to where -he may be stepping, is negligence on his part contributing -to the catching his foot in them.”</p> - -<p>When the doctrine of assumption of risk is inapplicable, -when personal negligence cannot be shown, and -when there has been no waiving of statutory provisions -by the workman, there is yet, in judicial eyes, -one last resort for the defendant company—the common-law -plea of negligence on the part of a fellow-workman. -There is some diversity of opinion among -eminent judges as to who are strictly fellow-servants. -“The courts of the majority of the States hold, however,” -writes Mr. Stephen D. Fessenden, in the <cite>Bulletin</cite> -of the Department of Labor for November, -1900, “that the mere difference in grades of employment, -or in authority, with respect to each other, does -not remove them from the class of fellow-servants as<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_109" id="Page_109">[109]</a></span> -regards the liability of the employer for injuries to -the one caused by the negligence of the other.” Thus -it has happened that a workman acting in the capacity -of agent for his employer, and ordering other -workmen to do tasks at which injuries have resulted, -has been held to be a fellow-servant—a judgment -relieving his employer of liability. To the lay mind -it would seem that workmen in different departments -could hardly be classed as fellow-servants; and the -United States Supreme Court has rendered a decision -which makes possible, under certain circumstances, -such a discrimination. Since then, however, the -Federal courts have suffered a reaction on the question, -and current decisions tend the other way.</p> - -<p>A case before a State tribunal—the Supreme Court -of Georgia (35 Southeastern Reporter, 365)—illustrates -the possibilities which lie in this doctrine. A -lineman, while repairing a wire for the Brush Electric -Light and Power Company, at Savannah, Ga., was -killed through the act of the engineer in turning -on the current. The city court of Savannah gave -damages to his widow. The case was taken to the -State Supreme Court, and decision rendered March -3, 1900. The counsel for the plaintiff contended -that the fellow-servant doctrine could not apply, on -account of the lineman and engineer working in -different departments, “so that there was no opportunity -for the exertion of a mutual influence upon -each other’s carefulness.” The court, however, reversed -the verdict.</p> - -<p>The disparity of opinion between inferior judges -and superior judges in cases of this kind is remarkable.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_110" id="Page_110">[110]</a></span> -The monthly <cite>Bulletins</cite> of the Department of -Labor give a fairly excellent summary of court -decisions on labor questions. He who reads them -will find the expression, “judgment of the lower -court reversed,” recurring with a rather painful -iteration; unless, indeed, the decision of the lower -court has rebuked the plaintiff, when the expression, -“judgment of the lower court affirmed,” is usually -found. Mr. George W. Alger, in an article on -“The Courts and Factory Legislation,” in the -<cite>American Journal of Sociology</cite> for November, 1900, -gives the following careful and temperately worded -summary of recent reversals in employers’ liability -cases in New York State:—</p> - -<p>“The percentage of reversals on appeal in master-and-servant -cases of this kind, when the verdict of -the juries in the courts below had been in plaintiff’s -favor, is perhaps larger than in any other branch of -litigation. In New York, for example, an examination -of twenty volumes of the Court of Appeals -reports (126 N. Y.-156 N. Y.) shows written opinions -in thirty-seven such cases. Of these: (1) in -three cases the juries in the lower court had found -for defendant, and plaintiff was the appellant; (2) -in four cases the court below had dismissed plaintiff’s -case as insufficient, without requiring defendant to -introduce any testimony; (3) in thirty cases the -juries below had found for plaintiff with substantial -damages. The Court of Appeals in class (1) affirmed -all of the cases where plaintiff was defeated -below. In class (2) it reversed the four cases where -plaintiff had been summarily non-suited and sent<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_111" id="Page_111">[111]</a></span> -the cases back to trial courts to hear defendant’s -testimony: a partial victory at most for plaintiff. -In class (3), where plaintiff had actually received a -verdict, of the thirty cases twenty-eight were reversed. -These statistics are interesting as showing how complete -is the lack of harmony between the courts, at -least in New York, and the moral sense of the -people by whom the courts were created, in regard -to these cases. Twice in thirty times do the opinions -of the learned judges of New York’s highest -court coincide with the opinions of juries of citizens -as to the requirements of justice.”</p> - -<p>The tendency, which is most clearly indicated by -the mass of decisions in cases demanding damages -for injuries or death, is the growing disposition to -make property paramount and life subordinate. It -is a common practice to set aside verdicts of damages -on the score that they are excessive. It is no less a -common practice to instruct the jury to decide for -the defendant in order to rebuke litigation. The -language of the leading work on one phase of this -subject—Shearman and Redfield’s “A Treatise on -the Law of Negligence”—sums up the matter in a -few words:—</p> - -<p>“It has become quite common for judges to state -as the ground of decisions the necessity of restricting -litigation. Reduced to plain English, this means -the necessity of compelling the great majority of men -and women to submit to injustice in order to relieve -judges from the labor of awarding justice.... The -stubborn resistance of business corporations, common -carriers, and mill-owners, to the enforcement of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_112" id="Page_112">[112]</a></span> -most moderate laws for the protection of human -beings from injury, and their utter failure to provide -such protection of their own accord, ought to satisfy -any impartial judge that true justice demands a constant -expansion of the law in the direction of increased -responsibility for negligence.”</p> - - -<h3>II</h3> - -<p>“Law,” wrote Sir Edward Coke, “is the perfection -of reason.” This may be true; but, if so, it tends to -throw mankind over to the position of the Catholics, -that the reason itself needs considerable perfecting. -This is not only the disposition of the lay mind, but, -evidently, also of the supreme judicial mind; for a -large part of the higher judicial activity during recent -years has been expended in declaring null and void -laws passed by two houses of the people’s representatives -and signed by an elected Governor or President. -Mr. Stimson, in his summary of labor legislation for -the years 1887-97, found that only 114 out of the -1639 laws passed had been declared unconstitutional. -But these 114 comprised examples from 19 out of the -35 classes of legislation passed, and must therefore -have reacted upon a very considerable number of the -remainder. It is a coincidence which has been noted -before, and need not be specially insisted upon here, -that the overwhelming majority of laws which fail to -reach the constitutional standards set by our judges -are those intended to safeguard the interests of the -industrially subordinate and to set some limitation to -the powers of the industrially mighty.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_113" id="Page_113">[113]</a></span></p> - -<p>The judicial mind, however, affects to know no -difference between high and low, between weak and -strong; and thus its decisions, ignoring actual conditions, -tend more and more to strengthen the powers -of one class and to weaken the powers of another. -“Liberty” is the shibboleth; the citizen must be free -to act as he wills. Somewhat curiously, though, -liberty of speech, press, and assemblage is not so -strenuously insisted upon; and, indeed, by injunctions -and other judicial determinations is at times rather -severely limited: the miners of West Virginia have -been recently enjoined from holding meetings on their -own grounds. But economic liberty—the liberty of -the dependent classes to do acts which, in the nature -of things, they cannot possibly do—is held for a -sacred principle. The doctrine of the extension of -the State’s police power, limiting the foregoing doctrine, -has gained some headway since the Utah decision -confirmed a State’s right to limit the hours of -work for men in dangerous trades; but the determination -of how far it is to be applied rests largely with -the forty-eight State and Territorial courts; and it is -a safe guess that it will meet with stiff resistance if -incarnated in further “advanced” legislation.</p> - -<p>“No discrimination,” which in effect means much -discrimination, follows the judicial shibboleth of -“liberty.” Especially zealous for the protection of -liberty and keenly watchful of proposed discrimination -is that eminent tribunal, the Supreme Court of -Illinois. Some six years ago it discovered that the -statute regulating the hours of women workers in the -factories contravened the Federal and State constitutional<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_114" id="Page_114">[114]</a></span> -guarantees of “life, liberty, and property.” A -woman’s labor was her property, and any limitation -of it was a deprivation “without due process of law.” -On December 20, 1900, it fell to the lot of this tribunal -to pass upon two labor laws,—to the lay mind -entirely different in principle,—and, by a somewhat -difficult struggling along parallel lines of argument, -triumphantly to reach conclusions adverse to both of -them. One was the Chicago ordinance requiring -union labor and an eight-hour day on all public work -contracted for; the other the State statute prohibiting -discharge of an employee for belonging to a labor -union. Regarding the ordinance, the union requirement, -in the words of Associate Justice Magruder, -“amounts to a discrimination between different -classes of citizens.” It is therefore void, and the -eight-hour provision is also void, because it “infringes -upon the freedom of contract, to which every citizen -is entitled under the law.... Any statute providing -that the employer and laborer may not agree with -each other as to what time shall constitute a day’s -work is an invalid act.” (58 Northeastern Reporter, -985.)</p> - -<p>Without venturing to discuss this ruling, one may -at least compare it with the ruling on the State statute. -The latter was a law intended to prevent discrimination -against union men. But, curiously to the unlegal -mind, it is discovered to be discrimination in <em>favor</em> of -the union man. “The act certainly does grant to that -class of laborers who belong to union labor organizations -a special privilege.” (58 Northeastern Reporter, -1007.) The act was also found to “contravene those<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_115" id="Page_115">[115]</a></span> -provisions of the State and Federal constitutions -which guarantee that no person shall be deprived of -‘life, liberty, or property without due process of law.’” -“That strain again,” as Orsino, in “Twelfth Night,” -exclaims. It has not, however, a “dying fall,” for it -has been taken up and echoed in other quarters since.</p> - -<p>The liberty of the employer to pay his employees -in brass checks or store orders was affirmed by the -Kansas Supreme Court on December 9, 1896, and -the act requiring payment in lawful money was declared -invalid. “To say that a free citizen can contract -for or agree to receive in return for his labor -one kind of property only, and that which represents -the smallest part of the aggregate wealth of the -country, is a clear restriction of the right to bargain -and trade, a suppression of individual effort, a denial -of inalienable rights.” Anti-truck acts were also declared -unconstitutional by the courts of Pennsylvania, -Ohio, Illinois, and West Virginia. The Kentucky -Supreme Court, however, nine months after the -Kansas decision, found that liberty and the compulsory -payment of wages in lawful money were compatible, -so that the question is at least open. Decisions -like that of the Kansas court, and the somewhat similar -decisions rendered in Pennsylvania, Illinois, and -Tennessee, of course fasten the laborer to the company -store; but of this the courts usually take no -cognizance. Actual liberty may be restrained, but -theoretical liberty must not be tampered with.</p> - -<p>Weekly payment laws are found to conflict with -liberty in Pennsylvania, Illinois, Missouri, West Virginia, -and Indiana. Moreover, the liberty of a legislature<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_116" id="Page_116">[116]</a></span> -to determine that prevailing wages shall be -paid to employees of city and State must not be confused -by the lay mind with the liberty of the wage-earner -to work under what conditions he must. For -the former is clearly unconstitutional, as decided in -New York by the Court of Appeals in February, -1901. “The effect of this statute [the Prevailing -Rate of Wages act],” reads the decision of Judge -Denis O’Brien, “was to make the city [of New -York] a trustee or instrument for the enforcement -of the law in the interests of the persons for whose -benefit it was enacted, and thus the powers and -functions of the municipality are employed for purposes -foreign to those for which they were created -and exist under the Constitution.” The eight-hour -laws passed in several of the States have generally -suffered the Illinois fate, although Kansas proved an -exception. Regulation of the working hours of women -was nullified not only in Illinois, but in Nebraska and -California. The police-power doctrine, as voiced in -the Utah decision, may justify a limitation of the -working day in dangerous trades, but otherwise such -a limitation appears to be an infringement of the -right of contract, or a deprivation of “property” -without “due process of law.” Even the National -Eight-hour law of 1868, while not strictly unconstitutional, -is held to be merely advisory. “We regard -the statute,” says the Supreme Court (94 U. S. 404), -“chiefly as in the nature of a direction from the -principal to his agent that eight hours is deemed to -be a proper length of time for a day’s labor, and that -his contract shall be based upon that theory.”</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_117" id="Page_117">[117]</a></span></p> - -<p>Anti-trust laws may be quite as lacking in constitutional -decorum as are eight-hour and prevailing-wages -laws; and the judiciary reserves to itself the -right to determine what are the standards. The -Texas Anti-trust law of 1889, for instance, overleapt -judicial sanction. “It is not every restriction of -competition or trade,” reads the decision of District -Judge Charles Swayne (February 22, 1897), “that is -illegal or against public policy, or that will justify -police regulation, but only such as are unwarrantable -or oppressive; and a State statute which prohibits -combinations formed for the purpose of reasonably -restricting competition violates the rights of contracts -guaranteed by the Federal Constitution.” (79 Federal -Reporter, 627.) Another legislature, with this lesson -before it, will know better where to set bounds to its -attempt at interference.</p> - -<p>One cannot pass this phase of the general subject -without recurring to the pertinent advice of the wise -Sir Francis Bacon. “Judges,” he wrote in his essay, -“Of Judicature,” “ought to remember that their office -is <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">jus dicere</i>, and not <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">jus dare</i>, to interpret law, and -not to make law.... Judges ought to be more -learned than witty, more reverend than plausible, -and more advised than confident.... A judge -ought to prepare his way to a just sentence, as God -useth to prepare his way, by raising valleys and -taking down hills; so when there appeareth on either -side a high hand, ... cunning advantages taken, -combination, power, great counsel, then is the virtue -of a judge seen to make inequality equal; that he -may paint his judgment as upon an even ground.”<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_118" id="Page_118">[118]</a></span> -Wise counsel! though it seems to have lacked -something in observance two hundred and seventy-five -years ago, and may be suspected, even yet, of -not always and everywhere reaching entire fulfilment.</p> - - -<h3>III</h3> - -<p>We have the testimony of no less eminent an -authority than United States District Judge John J. -Jackson, of the Northern District of West Virginia, -that in all his experience on the bench he could not -recall a single occasion when any court, either Federal -or State, ever abused the writ of injunction in strike -questions. It is a definite and authoritative pronouncement; -and the restrained and careful language -accompanying it, wherein the officials of labor unions -are described as “a professional set of agitators,” and -“vampires that fatten on the honest labor of the coal -miners,” certainly proves that it cannot be an <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">ex parte</i> -statement. Yet, for all that, there is a widely diffused -sentiment that the writ of injunction has occasionally -been abused in strike questions. In the same -locality, at about the same time, an injunction issued -by United States District Judge B. F. Keller, of the -Southern District of West Virginia, declared, among -a multitude of other prohibitions, that the strikers -“are further inhibited, enjoined, and restrained from -assembling in camp or otherwise,” even on grounds -leased by them for their meetings.</p> - -<p>A pamphlet, prepared by five members of the -New York Bar and issued by the Social Reform -Club, of New York City, in the summer of 1900,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_119" id="Page_119">[119]</a></span> -gives the substance of a number of injunctions that -have been issued against striking workmen. “In the -case of the Sun Printing and Publishing Company -<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">vs.</i> Delaney and others in December (1899),” says -the pamphlet:—</p> - -<p>“The Supreme Court of New York, among other -things, enjoined the defendants from the exercise of -their right to give the public their side of the controversy -with the <cite>Sun</cite> as an argument against advertising -in a paper which they claimed had treated them -unjustly; it also forbade them from attempting to -persuade newsdealers from selling the paper; and -finally wound up with a sweeping restraint ‘from in -any other manner or by any other means interfering -with the property, property rights, or business of the -plaintiff.’ It should be added that, on appeal, the -Appellate Division struck out these commands; but -they were so plainly subversive of fundamental rights -that it is difficult to see how they could have been -granted in the first instance.</p> - -<p>“In still another case last year—The Wheeling -Railway Company <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">vs.</i> John Smith and others (so -runs the title of the action without naming the -others)—in the United States Circuit Court, West -Virginia, two men not parties to the action, nor found -to be agents of ‘John Smith and others,’ whoever -they may have been, were punished for contempt of -court, for, among other things, ‘reviling’ and ‘cursing’ -the court? not at all, but for ‘reviling’ and -‘cursing’ employees of the railroad company. If -these men had not actually served out an imprisonment -in jail for thirty days as a punishment for contempt<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_120" id="Page_120">[120]</a></span> -of corporation, it might be thought that your -committee had taken this example from opera bouffe. -The legality of this punishment was never passed on -by the Supreme Court, for the reason, as your committee -understand, that the parties were unable to -bear the expense of taking it there, and so served -their term in jail.</p> - -<p>“During the final drafting of our report a temporary -injunction has been granted by a Justice of the -Supreme Court in New York City.... This injunction -forbids the defendants [certain members -of the Cigar Makers’ International Union] even from -approaching their former employers for the laudable -purpose of reaching an amicable result; it forbids -them from making their case known to the public -if the tendency of that is to vex the plaintiffs or -make them uneasy; it forbids them from trying in -a perfectly peaceable way in any place in the city, -even in the privacy of a man’s own home, to persuade -a new employee that justice is on their side, and that -he ought to sympathize with them sufficiently not to -work for unjust employers; and, finally, it forbids -the union from paying money to the strikers to support -their families during the strike.”</p> - -<p>Such instances, as the pamphlet states, can be -multiplied. Perhaps they do not wholly controvert -Judge Jackson’s declaration. But, at least, they -illustrate an unbridgeable disparity between the definitions -of justice held on the one hand by our interpreters -of law, and on the other by the overwhelming -majority of the citizenship. That disparity has been -great in all recent times; but weekly and daily it<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_121" id="Page_121">[121]</a></span> -grows greater. The stronger inclination of the judiciary -to make property the paramount interest is -everywhere observed; and the magnates, with an -exultant recognition of the fact, make haste to enjoy -the fruits of the new dispensation.</p> - - -<h3>IV</h3> - -<p>From judgeship to attorneyship of a great corporation -has recently become a common promotion. The -number of ex-judges who have been thus translated -to higher sees is notable: one finds or hears of them -in many places. Republics may be ungrateful, as -the adage runs, but not so the magnates. The gratitude -of the latter may not be wholly platonic; it -includes, no doubt, a lively sense of favors to come. -But whether prospective or retrospective, it expresses -itself in deeds of recompense, and that is the main -test. It is a discriminating gratitude, moreover. -Keenly enough, it recognizes the comparative value -of service. Other servitors of the magnates may -toil faithfully, and receive but moderate reward. -The moulders of opinion, such, for instance, as the -newspaper men, may ask for preferment, and be -met by the impatient retort of Richard III to Buckingham, -“I am not in the giving vein to-day.” But -for one who can interpret the law as it should be -interpreted, there are glory and riches to be had for -the asking.</p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"></div><!--Page break for ePub--> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_122" id="Page_122">[122]</a></span></p> - - - - -<h2>CHAPTER VII<br /> -<span class="titlefont smcap">Our Moulders of Opinion</span></h2> - - -<p>“There never was a time,” says Justice Brewer, -in the concluding lecture of a series recently delivered -by him at Yale University, “when public opinion was -more potent.” Possibly the saying is true; but whatever -force it may have lies in the application. Public -opinion may make for a general passivity—an acquiescence -in things as they are—quite as much as for -a general strenuousness. Nowhere, for instance, -among civilized peoples, is public opinion more powerful -than in a quiet and isolated community, held fast -to certain habitual modes of speech and action. Only -a brave man, or a desperate woman, so environed, -would dare defy the tribal customs.</p> - -<p>Public opinion in these United States may be more -potent than ever before, but the personal attitude -which it supports and encourages becomes more and -more one of acquiescence in the existing régime. A -legislative reaction and a judicial reaction are manifested; -and a growing irritation is expressed, as from -time to time those rude disturbers of the public peace, -the social reformers, come forward with plans for -curing imputed evils. Social and political quietism -becomes our everyday philosophy. An “air of contentment -and enthusiastic cheerfulness ... characterizes<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_123" id="Page_123">[123]</a></span> -our society,” writes Professor William G. -Sumner, of Yale, in a recent number of the <cite>Independent</cite>; -and though the judgment might be -somewhat more accurately worded, he is not far -wrong. A keen-eyed observer from Italy,—Professor -Angelo Mosso, of Turin,—who visited us a few -years ago, gives somewhat similar testimony. The -fact astonishes him, as he confesses, since he saw -much of political and industrial evil which he could -not comprehend a democracy enduring; yet for all -that the evidence was convincing.</p> - - -<h3>I</h3> - -<p>Among the causes making for this acquiescence in -existing social conditions, there are three which may -be considered here. The first is the one which so -strongly impressed Professor Mosso. It is the rage -for individual exploitation. The imaginations of -most men are fired by the spectacle of the few -achieving great fortunes; each believes that a like -fortune lies somewhere within his own reach, and -with blind fatuity he tolerates conditions which he -instinctively feels to be inequitable, simply because -he expects himself to master them. “I believe,” -writes Professor Mosso, “that the desire to become -wealthy is so strong and powerful in every American -that, in order to reserve the opportunity of realizing -such desire, Americans willingly submit to the continuance -of laws which allow such accumulations.” -It is the petty gambler’s faith, the conviction that, -though everything be against him, he will somehow<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_124" id="Page_124">[124]</a></span> -“beat the game.” And just as the petty gambler’s -faith is fostered by the runners and “cappers” for -faro, policy, roulette, and keno, so the faith of the -industrial underling is fostered by a tremendous -trumpeting of the ways and means to worldly “success.” -The preaching of “success” has become, in -these last five years, a distinct profession, honored -and well recompensed.</p> - -<p>A second cause of the prevailing acquiescence in -the present régime applies more particularly to social -reformers, and to those who, while not actively enlisted -as “come-outers,” do yet sympathize with the -activities of their more aggressive brethren. It is a -feeling, born of years of experience in promoting -some collective good, of the hopelessness of achievement. -Opposed at all points, frustrated at many, -there comes a time, sooner or later, when all but the -most resolute reformers are forced to admit that little -or nothing can be done. Many thereupon fall back -into the ranks of the do-nothings and the care-nothings; -while others, in whom the fire of purpose is -not entirely quenched, reluctantly exchange their -radical and comprehensive plans of social changes for -more narrow and immediate purposes,—the giving of -small charities, the doing of near-at-hand services, -and the occasional support of a particular public -measure.</p> - - -<h3>II</h3> - -<p>A third, and perhaps the most important, cause is -the continual output from pulpit, sanctum, forum, -and college chair, of our professional moulders of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_125" id="Page_125">[125]</a></span> -opinion. Now not all of this output, it is freely conceded, -makes for acquiescence; but the overwhelming -mass of it unquestionably does. From these -instructors of the people we learn that conditions, -while not perfect, either are reasonably near to perfection, -or, if evil, are not to be corrected except by -individual regeneration. We learn of the irrationality -or the moral obliquity of discontent; the viciousness -or fanaticism of impertinent persons who seek to -change things; the virtues of obedience; the obligation -of toil (specifically directed to those who are -doing most of the world’s work, for the profit of -others), and of the worth, benevolence, and indispensability -of our magnates.</p> - -<p>The denunciation of discontent becomes more common -and more emphatic. A plentiful crop of instances -is always forthcoming to any one who cares to look for -them. The generation of Rousseau and the following -generation of Jefferson set high hopes for mankind -on the faculty of discontent. The past generation, -compromising between theology and evolution, found -in discontent a perpetual factor making for the creation -of a better environment. But our present reaction -takes us back to the days of the Stuarts. The magnificent -invectives of Dryden, voiced in that—</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> -<div class="stanza"> -<div class="indentone">“full resounding line,</div> -<div class="indentbase">The long majestic march and energy divine,”</div> -</div></div></div> - -<p>against the sedition and discontent frequently manifested -during the reign of Charles II, might serve -for a thousand texts for present-day sermons, lectures, -and editorials. The thought, common these last hundred<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_126" id="Page_126">[126]</a></span> -years, that discontent is usually the result of -privation, wrong, or oppression, is given over; and -our modern moulders of opinion revert to the notion -that it is fostered by ease and comfort.</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> -<div class="stanza"> -<div class="indentquotebase">“To what would he on quail and pheasant swell</div> -<div class="indentbase">That even on tripe and carrion could rebel?”</div> -</div></div></div> - -<p>asks “Glorious John” in satirizing his rival Shadwell. -Tripe and carrion did not form the usual nourishment -for rebellion. We find the same idea constantly echoed -in very recent days; and the demands of organized -workmen for better pay are almost invariably regarded -in certain intellectual circles as evidences, not of need, -but of the pride and rebelliousness engendered by an -already attained competency.</p> - -<p>Honors are even between churchmen and lay publicists, -when it comes to the denunciation of discontent. -The pulpit, the stump, the college chair, and the -editorial sanctum are alike busied with its condemnation. -Perhaps a typical protagonist in the work was -the late E. L. Godkin. The thought recurs again -and again in his writings. “I must frankly say,” he -avers in his essay, “Social Classes in the Republic,” -“that I know of no more mischievous person than -the man who, in free America, seeks to spread among -them [the workers] the idea that they are wronged -and kept down by somebody; that somebody is to -blame because they are not better lodged, better -dressed, better educated, and have not easier access -to balls, concerts, or dinner parties.” Whereupon, to -make clear his contention, he tells of the following -pathetic little episode:—</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_127" id="Page_127">[127]</a></span></p> - -<p>“Two years ago I was in one of the University -Settlements in New York, and was walking through -the rooms of the society with one of the members. -They were plain and neat and suitable, and he explained -to me that the purpose in furnishing and -fitting them up was to show the workingmen the -kind of rooms they ought to have ‘if justice were -done.’ To tell this to a workingman, without telling -him in what the injustice consisted and who worked -it if he had not such rooms, was, I held, to be most -mischievous.”</p> - -<p>Even President Roosevelt, doubtless impressed by -the modern reiteration of the notion, felt called upon, -in his Providence speech (August 23d), to rebuke -discontent, and incidentally to identify it with envy. -“Not only do the wicked flourish,” he says, “when -the times are such that most men flourish, but what -is worse, the spirit of envy and jealousy and hatred -springs up in the breasts of those who, though they -may be doing fairly well themselves, yet see others, -who are no more deserving, doing far better.”</p> - -<p>Education, in the modern view, is largely responsible -for discontent, and should be restricted. Judge -Simeon A. Baldwin, of the Connecticut Supreme -Court, and lecturer in the Yale Law School, is quite -certain upon this point. His “signed editorial,” in -the April 9th issue of a New York newspaper -published by the Yale lecturer on journalism, expresses -a view which is coming to be widely held. -Our young men, he notes with great complacency, -are obliged to leave school early, in order to go to -work; and he thereupon urges that young women<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_128" id="Page_128">[128]</a></span> -also should clip their education at an early age. -“Girls would make better wives and mothers and -housekeepers,” he writes, “if they finished school at -from fourteen to sixteen years of age. As it is, they -obtain a smattering of many studies, which in my -opinion cannot do them much good. They are -possessed by a spirit of unrest to-day, and develop -ambitions not compatible with the happiest homes.”</p> - -<p>Professor Harry Thurston Peck expresses the -modern view more succinctly. Professor Peck, it -may be stated for the benefit of the unenlightened, is -an instructor of Latin in Columbia University. No -pent-up Utica, however, contracts his powers; he has -courageously sallied forth from his particular domain -and has taken all knowledge for his province. Over -this province he ranges with unconstrained freedom, -noting what he will, and, with something of the -“large utterance of the early gods,” making known -to a waiting world his impressions and beliefs. What -a great lexicographer said of an amiable poet may be -repeated in present praise: He touches nothing that -he does not adorn. Some intellectual limitations it -is possible he may have; but as a reflector of certain -current views obtaining in high places he is probably -without a peer. In his article, “Some Phases of -American Education,” in the <cite>Cosmopolitan</cite> magazine -a few years ago, he put the matter in this way:—</p> - -<p>“Linked closely with many other very serious educational -mistakes, and from many points of view by -far the most profoundly serious of them all, is that -curious fancy, which is almost universal among our -people, that education in itself and for all human<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_129" id="Page_129">[129]</a></span> -beings is a good and thoroughly desirable possession.... -There is probably in our whole system to-day no -principle so fundamentally untrue as this, and there is -certainly none that is fraught with so much social -and political peril for the future. For education -means ambition, and ambition means discontent.”</p> - -<p>But, as Shakespeare’s Fluellen remarks, “the -phrase is a little variations.” All discontent is not -the same, and that which stirs in the bosom of Professor -Peck must be carefully discriminated from the -sort nurtured by plain John Smith. “Nothing so -dainty sweet as lovely melancholy,” sang Sir John -Fletcher; but what is meet for an Elizabethan poet -or a present-day philosopher may be most unmeet for -a common plebeian. “Now discontent,” continues -this pharos of the unenlightened, “is in itself a divine -thing. When it springs up in a strong, creative intellect, -capable of translating it into actual achievement, -it is the mother of all progress; but when it -germinates in a limited and feeble brain, it is the -mother of unhappiness alone.”</p> - -<p>Dr. Arthur Twining Hadley, president of Yale -University, also has doubts. His recent book, “The -Education of the American Citizen,” might be supposed, -from its title, to be a plea for the popular diffusion -of knowledge. Such it is, in fact, only the -author draws the line at “sociology and politics and -civics and finance.” “When the plea is urged, as it -so often is,” he writes, “that they constitute a necessary -and valuable training for citizenship, we are -justified in making a distinct protest. Except within -the narrowest limits, they do harm rather than good.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_130" id="Page_130">[130]</a></span> -As ordinarily taught, ... they tend to prepare the -minds of the next generation to look to superficial -remedies for political evils, instead of seeing that the -only true remedy lies in the creation of a sound public -sentiment.”</p> - -<p>The term, “superficial remedies for political evils,” -means, in plain words, social legislation; and it -brings up a second matter upon which our moulders -of opinion have made a considerable approach to -unanimity. We hear legislation flouted on all sides, -and appeals made for individual regeneration. The -matter-of-fact persons who hold that sixty years of -factory acts have had more to do with establishing -humane conditions in certain quarters of the planet -than nineteen hundred years of hortatory appeals to -the individual man, are dismissed with a smile of contempt; -and the declaration is made that most legislation -is mischievous, and that nothing but character counts. -Mr. Godkin was “far from denying that legislation -and political changes have been the direct means of -great good,” though he held that “every good change -in legislation or in government has been preceded -or brought about by an increase of intelligence, of -reasonableness, or of brotherly kindness on the part -of the people at large.” A conclusion, to say the -least, not overfreighted with historical learning, since -many and perhaps most reformatory laws have been -passed by an earnest minority against the active opposition -of many, and despite the stolid passivity of -most, and what mankind has heretofore called social -progress has been largely due to the reaction of such -laws and like institutions upon individual character.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_131" id="Page_131">[131]</a></span></p> - -<p>President Hadley differs somewhat from Mr. Godkin. -Too much stress, he believes, is laid upon the -mechanism of government and of industry, and too -little upon the force by which this mechanism is kept -at work.</p> - -<p>“Not by the axioms of metaphysics on the one -hand, nor by the machinery of legislation on the -other,” he writes, “can we deal with the questions -which vex human society.... Conscious of its -honesty of purpose, it [democracy] is impatient of -opposition, and contemptuous of difficulties, however -real. It undertakes a vast amount of regulation of -economic and social life in fields where two generations -ago a free government would scarce have dared -to enter. In these new regulations there are many -instances of failure, and relatively few of success. -We have had much infringement of personal liberty, -with little or no corresponding benefit to the -community.”</p> - -<p>In Justice Brewer’s recent volume of Yale lectures, -also, there is much regard for character, and much -even for associated work in bettering the life of the -nation. But as to legislation as a means of achieving -this betterment, there is a cautious silence. There -is the declaration that each man in free America is -a ruler—glad tidings to the persons ignorant -thereof. There are some original lines,—</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> -<div class="stanza"> -<div class="indentquotebase">“The moulds of fate</div> -<div class="indentbase">That shape the State</div> -<div class="indentbase">And make or mar the commonweal,”</div> -</div></div></div> - -<p>which, though somewhat reminiscent of the good-natured -Bottom’s lines,—</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_132" id="Page_132">[132]</a></span></p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> -<div class="stanza"> -<div class="indentquotebase">“And Phibbus’ car</div> -<div class="indentbase">Shall shine from far</div> -<div class="indentbase">And make and mar</div> -<div class="indentbase">The foolish fates,”</div> -</div></div></div> - -<p>do yet body forth the noble summation:—</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> -<div class="stanza"> -<div class="indentquotebase">“The crowning fact,</div> -<div class="indentbase">The kingliest act</div> -<div class="indentbase">Of Freedom is the Freeman’s vote!”</div> -</div></div></div> - -<p>But though the freeman’s vote is a kingly prerogative, -there is no suggestion that he shall use it in -initiating or passing upon legislation for the collective -good. Rather the plea is for obedience; and -the warning is of those violators of the public peace, -the labor organizations.</p> - -<p>So, too, Mr. Stimson. “The unexpected weakness -of democratic government,” he writes, “is -its belief that statutes can amend both nature and -human nature.” And he rejoices that the judiciary, -convinced, no doubt, that neither human nature nor -its manifestations can be amended by statutes, have -actively intervened by declaring many laws unconstitutional. -He finds, moreover, that the general -principle which has caused the adverse action of the -courts, is that these statutes have been “restrictive -of private liberty, of the right of a free citizen to use -his own property, and his own personal powers in -such a way as he will, if so be that he do not injure -others.” A perspicuous and conclusive judgment, -no doubt, considering that the very point at issue is -the matter of injury to others. He is not satisfied -with condemning legislation, moreover, but proceeds<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_133" id="Page_133">[133]</a></span> -further to a gentle remonstrance with the classes of -persons who have urged certain regulative laws. -Labor leaders, he discovers, distrust experience, and -Socialists detest lucidity—a brace of acute judgments -in the face of the fact that the thing actually -rated highest in trade-union circles is experience, and -that whatever the defects of Socialists or of their -system may be, the signal contributions of the best -Socialist writers to the study of political economy -have been lucidity of thought and definiteness of -expression.</p> - -<p>So, too, Professor Sumner, Professor Walter A. -Wyckoff, the entertaining author of “The Workers,” -and a host of other instructors of the public, the -mere roster of whose names would require several -pages of fine print. Of the only two safeguards of -the dependent classes against complete exploitation—social -legislation and the labor society—our -moulders of opinion would seem to have taken the -job of demolishing the former, leaving to the magnates -themselves the task of attending to the latter.</p> - -<p>With many if not most of these publicists the criticism -is delivered not only at protective laws, but at -the force behind them—democracy. “Every age,” -writes Professor Sumner, “is befooled by the notions -which are in fashion in it. Our age is befooled by -‘democracy.’ We hear arguments about the industrial -organization which are deductions from democratic -dogmas, or which appeal to prejudice by using analogies -drawn from democracy to affect sentiment about -industrial relations.” Many of our moulders of opinion -elaborate the argument often made in the writings of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_134" id="Page_134">[134]</a></span> -our literary magnates, that only men who are themselves -possessed of property should have any voice in -the disposition of wealth or the regulation of property -rights. To justify this view recourse is had to several -recently imported dogmas, fashioned by Mr. W. H. -Mallock, author of “Aristocracy and Evolution.” All -increase of wealth, all advance in knowledge and -virtue, contends Mr. Mallock, come from an aristocracy—a -word which he defines as meaning the “exceptionally -gifted and efficient minority, no matter what -the position in which its members may have been -born, or what the sphere of social progress in which -their efficiency shows itself.” Therefore, since the -efficient have produced everything above the maximum -which the ignorant and unskilled workman can produce -without this higher aid, it follows that the efficient -should be left in untroubled possession of their -holdings. The large assumption among others in -Mr. Mallock’s argument—that those who efficiently -sow and those who richly reap are the same persons—need -not concern us here. It is sufficient to point -out that his argument has been eagerly taken up by -a number of our own moulders of opinion, fostered and -even developed to further conclusions.</p> - -<p>Professor Peck, for instance, rather heroically improving -on the spirit, and not infrequently following -the text, of Mr. Mallock, puts the matter in this -way:—</p> - -<p>“Every really great thing that has been accomplished -in the history of man has been accomplished -by an aristocracy. It may have called itself a sacerdotal -aristocracy, or a military aristocracy, or an aristocracy<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_135" id="Page_135">[135]</a></span> -based on birth and blood, yet these distinctions -were but superficial; for in reality it always meant -one thing alone—the community of interest and -effort in those whose intellectual force and innate -gift of government enabled them to dominate and -control the destinies of States, driving in harness the -hewers of wood and drawers of water who constitute -the vast majority of the human race, and whose happiness -is greater and whose welfare is more thoroughly -conserved when governed than when governing.”</p> - -<p>The argument that the gifted produce all, and the -assumption that the wealthy and the gifted are the -same persons lead up to the fervid praise of inequality -of condition which in recent years is so often heard. -Our literary magnates began the strain, doubtless -with the motive of self-justification. Since then it -has been taken up by our professional instructors—from -what motive is not precisely known—and the -result is a mighty chorus of many voices. Says Professor -Sumner:—</p> - -<p>“If we could get rid of some of our notions about -liberty and equality, and could lay aside this eighteenth-century -philosophy, according to which human -society is to be brought into a state of blessedness, -we might get some insight into the might of the societal -organization: what it does for us and what it makes -us do.... If we are willing to be taught by the -facts, then the phenomena of the concentration of -wealth which we see about us will convince us that -they are just what the situation calls for. They ought -to be because they are, and because nothing else -would serve the interests of society.... I often see<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_136" id="Page_136">[136]</a></span> -statements published in which the objectors lay stress -upon the great inequalities of fortune, and having set -forth the contrast between rich and poor, they rest -their case. What law of nature, religion, ethics, or -the State is violated by inequalities of fortune? The -inequalities prove nothing.”</p> - -<p>Professor John B. Clark, of Columbia University, -also sees in vast inequalities of fortune the basis of a -happy state. Aristotle taught differently, it is true. -“In human societies,” he wrote, “extremes of wealth -and poverty are the main sources of evil. The one -brings arrogance and a lack of capacity to obey; the -other brings slavishness and a lack of capacity to -command. Where a population is divided into the -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.” But Professor Clark, -touched by prophetic fire, pictures a new society in -which inequality is the great blessing. “The world -of the near future,” he writes in his recent article -on “The Society of the Future,” “will not be one -with inequalities levelled out of it; and to any persons -to whom inequality of possessions seems inherently -evil, this world will not be satisfactory. It will -present a condition of vast and ever growing inequality. -With a democracy that depends on a likeness -of material possessions it will have nothing in -common. The rich will continually grow richer, and -the multi-millionnaires will approach the billion-dollar -standard.... If an earthly Eden is to come through -competition, it will come not in spite of, but by means<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_137" id="Page_137">[137]</a></span> -of, an enormous increase of inequality of outward -possessions.”</p> - -<p>We must hear from Professor Peck again—and -for the last time. “When men by temper and training,” -he writes in his recent paper on “The Social -Advantages of the Concentration of Wealth,” “come -to possess the ability to do large things in this direct -and simple way [<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">i.e.</i>, the characteristic way, of the -magnates], they have an immense advantage over -those who can work only in committees, or boards, or -companies, and they will inevitably dominate them -and use them quite at will.... This [concentration] -means, in the first place and as a first result, -the aggrandizement of individuals; but in the end it -means the wide diffusion of a golden stream through -every artery and vein of our national and individual -life. America has already been enormously enriched; -yet the actualities of the present are nothing when -compared with the potentialities of the future. Timid -minds which are appalled rather than inspired by the -vastness and magnificence of the whole thing shrink -back and croak out puling prophecies of evil. They -cannot rise to the greatness of it all because they -lack the dauntless courage of the typical American, -who, in Kipling’s vivid phrase, can always—</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> -<div class="stanza"> -<div class="indentquotebase">“‘Turn a keen, untroubled face</div> -<div class="indentbase">Home to the instant need of things.’”</div> -</div></div></div> - - -<h3>III</h3> - -<p>So much for a consensus of some of our notable -instructors of the public on things political and social.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_138" id="Page_138">[138]</a></span> -That these opinions produce a powerful influence on -the mass, no one will deny. The wide respect in -which our teachers—particularly our commissioned -teachers—are held; the general recognition of their -learning, their profundity, their unquestioned liberty -to speak what they will, their insulated freedom from -the influences arising out of seigniorial endowments, -compel a popular deference to their judgments. It -is, therefore, with pained surprise that an American -reads an uncharitable comment on their ability and -learning. Such a comment is that which appeared -last February in the conservative and ably edited -Paris <cite>Temps</cite>. “It is true,” writes its editor, “that -American universities pay great attention to social -and political sciences. It is no less true that they -have at their disposal considerable financial resources -for the publication of reviews. But the question is -to know what the reviews and teachings are worth.... -I believe myself sufficiently conversant with -the matter. By professional duty I read, not everything -which is printed on the other side of the Atlantic -concerning these subjects, but a notable part of -the work which is considered the most weighty. -With a few honorable exceptions—honorable, but -rare—I must venture to say that these publications -are, for the most part, without originality and without -any real value.</p> - -<p>“I imagine American professors will be the first to -feel surprise at the great honor [the establishment of -a French school in America] which it is proposed -to do them. They have a very keen feeling of what -they owe to European culture. They keep in close<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_139" id="Page_139">[139]</a></span> -touch with all that is published in their respective -specialties in France, Germany, England, and Italy. -They profit by such publications, of which their own -are sometimes—let us say things as they are—only -adaptations or reflections. Many of them have had -their intellectual training in old Europe, and had, at -their start, no other ambition than to model themselves -on their masters and repeat them. The development -of social and political studies is immense—on the -surface—in the United States. In depth it is not -quite the same.”</p> - -<p>The <cite>Temps</cite>, it may be remarked, is not, on the one -hand, radical, nor on the other, anti-democratic or -anti-American; and so the reasons for its illiberal and -discourteous judgment must be left undiscerned. Its -startling declaration, that the sociological pronouncements -of our distinguished teachers “are, for the most -part, without originality and without any real value,” -rises to the dignity of a national affront, and rightly -calls for emphatic action from our strenuous State -Department.</p> - - -<h3>IV</h3> - -<p>It may be doubted if our commissioned teachers -exert so great an influence upon opinion as do our -newspapers. “The newspaper to-day,” said Archbishop -Ireland recently before the National Educational -Association, “is preëminently the mentor of -the people; it is read by all; it is believed by nearly -all. Its influence is paramount; its responsibility is -tremendous.” There is much truth in this dictum,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_140" id="Page_140">[140]</a></span> -though something of qualification is needed. The -newspaper, though not “read by all,” nor “believed -by nearly all,” is indeed more widely read than ever -before. If the census is to be believed, the circulation -per issue of all daily, tri-weekly, semi-weekly, and -weekly publications has grown in the last ten years -from 38,000,000 to 58,000,000 copies. This is certainly -a tremendous showing; but it is doubtful if the -newspapers exert the direct sway over men’s minds -which was exerted in earlier years. The influence -effected is due less to the formal expression of opinion -than to the color habitually given by them to the -news. The eager question, “What does old Greeley -say?” which was once so often heard, was a tribute -to the power of an individual in whose rectitude -and wisdom many thousands put a rarely wavering -faith. Many a lesser editor had also his reverent -disciples, who believed as he taught and voted as he -urged.</p> - -<p>But in our day the direct appeal of the newspaper -is more hesitatingly obeyed. Frequently it has happened, -in municipal elections, that a candidate or -candidates have been elected in the face of an almost -solid opposition of the press. A newspaper may be -patronized for this or that special feature by persons -who pay no attention to its editorials, by others who -read them merely to learn an opposing view of things, -and by others still—a far larger class—who, reading -between the lines, choose for themselves what to rely -upon and what to doubt. All the larger cities, and -perhaps most of the smaller, have instances of newspapers -which, appealing to some special interest,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_141" id="Page_141">[141]</a></span> -secure a considerable number of readers antipathetic -to the political views expressed. It happens that -radicals often read conservative publications, and that -conservatives sometimes look upon radical print. The -faithful devotees of a certain mercurial New York -newspaper probably read it as eagerly in 1884, when -it supported General Butler for the Presidency, as in -1892, when it supported Mr. Cleveland, or in 1896, -when it went over to Major McKinley. But reliance -upon editorial opinions is a wavering faith. A wiser -discrimination is employed, a more cynical scepticism -is maintained. When the New York newspaper which -boasts of printing all the fit news publishes in its -editorial columns the dictum that “the oversupply of -labor in the anthracite region is due to the great -attractiveness of the wages and the conditions of -work,” none but the willing are convinced; and so -for all the misjudgments, ignorant or deliberate, that -are daily put forth by newspapers of all classes -there are scoffers and sceptics as well as credulous -believers.</p> - -<p>For the recognition has become general that the -average newspaper is owned and operated as a commercial -property. As Mr. Brooke Fisher, in a recent -number of the <cite>Atlantic</cite>, writes, the days when the -editor hired the publisher are gone; it is now the -publisher who hires the editor, and the counting-room -determines the policy. Advertising is the -material mainstay, and the merchants and magnates -who have largesse to distribute must be humored. -“Publishers,” says the interesting census bulletin on -“Printing and Publishing,” “are depending more on<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_142" id="Page_142">[142]</a></span> -advertising and less on subscriptions and sales for -financial return.” Whether it be the sensational -“yellows,” or the less sensational but characterless -“pinks,” or the staid and ponderous “grays” of the -press, the same rule holds. Even the religious journals -make a like appeal. “A superfluity of religious -weeklies,” says the best-known publication of that -class, giving itself a left-handed pat on the shoulder, -“with no other basis for existence than sectional or -partisan pride, will not be tolerated nor supported by -the laity; nor will advertisers much longer fail to -discriminate between religious journals that are progressive -[meaning, for example, itself] and are -reaching well-to-do and intelligent people, and those -which are not.” Statements of enormous sales, of -vast subscription lists, are published in glaring type, -and the phrase “greatest circulation in the city,” or -State, or nation, or world, is trumpeted to the ears of -the buyers of advertising space. There is still an -appeal to the giver of largesse even when a publication -cannot honestly boast of great circulation; the -argument is then one of a “select” patronage—of -“fit audience, though few,” but inferentially of great -purchasing power.</p> - -<p>The pressure upon editorial policy of this deference -to the advertiser is constant and effective, and the -result is apparent to most readers. Even the more -rampant of the “yellows,” which daily shriek against -political and social injustice, are affected by it. As -mournful a philosopher as Heraclitus might have -found food for humor in the manœuvres of the metropolitan -newspapers some six years ago during the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_143" id="Page_143">[143]</a></span> -agitation for the passage of the Andrews bill. This -measure required seats for women workers in all -mercantile establishments. Now it happened that -the heads of the department stores were in nearly -every instance violently opposed to the bill, and it -also happened that the amount of advertising from -the great stores cut a very pretty figure in the income -of the average metropolitan newspaper. To complete -the dilemma the bill won great favor from the public. -How the masterful purveyors of news and opinions -to the people managed to extricate themselves from -the difficulty, would make too long a story in the -telling. But that they triumphantly surmounted it, -is a matter of history.</p> - -<p>With the advertiser in so commanding a position, -it is not needed that a newspaper shall be owned by -a magnate in order that it shall faithfully reflect the -special interests of “business.” Yet that seigniorial -funds are back of many of our important newspapers -is a fact which to a person of intelligence needs no -proof. The census bulletin, revealing the characteristic -optimism of the compilers of the Twelfth Census, -will have it that individual ownership is still the -rule. The proportion of individually owned and -operated publications is given as 63.3 per cent, of -partnership concerns as 19.7 per cent, and of corporate -concerns as 17 per cent. “These figures -indicate,” we are told, “the complete absence of -the extended combinations and consolidations so frequently -encountered in other industries.” Yet there -are combinations, whether individually or jointly -owned,—the Hearst newspapers in San Francisco,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_144" id="Page_144">[144]</a></span> -Chicago, and New York, the Ochs newspapers of -Chattanooga, New York, and Philadelphia, the Belo -newspapers of Texas, and those of the Scripps-McRae -concern in the middle West. Only this last -summer public announcement was made of a projected -combination—under the control of Mr. P. F. -Collier, and with a capital of $1,000,000—of a large -number of country newspapers in the State of New -York. The project has for the time been given up, -but others of a like nature may fairly be expected for -the future. Moreover, some of the features of the -industrial combinations—identity of product, for -instance—are discoverable in the so-called coöperative -newspapers, which make use of plate matter or -“patent-insides.” More than half of all the periodicals -of the country are in this class. Finally, the -chief commodity of newspapers of all classes—the -news—is a trust product, a commodity in which -the Associated Press serves the function of gatherer -of raw material and manufacturer, and the periodical -the function of assorter and retailer.</p> - -<p>But the census figures reveal little or nothing to -the point. Seigniorial backing, when actually given, -is not usually made visible in the form of investment -in newspaper stock. It is not to the best interests of -the purveyor of news and opinions that it should be; -for the public, with a fine sense of its own independence -of judgment, requires that seigniorial influence -shall be less obviously shown. The odor of Standard -oil, the fumes of American tobacco, have proved fatal -to more than one newspaper enterprise, and even the -taint of railroad support has been shown to be harmful.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_145" id="Page_145">[145]</a></span> -There is thus the greatest need of discretion in -arranging the nominal ownership; and the result is, -that in many cases it is easier to discover the actual -ownership of a policy game than the actual ownership -of a newspaper. The curious can but surmise -and wonder. When a chaste and well-ordered daily -publication gives to a particular magnate’s house-warming -the space of a column and a half, while its -rivals—even the “yellows,” which deal in that sort -of thing—consider the event worth no more than a -half-column; or when another magnate is persistently -“boomed” for a high office, or when for another a -franchise grant is skilfully proposed, one may put -two and two together, and apply the natural inferences. -Inferences, however, are not proof, and the -conclusion must remain doubtful.</p> - -<p>But whether through the influence of potential -advertising or of secret ownership, the magnate, or -the magnate class, exercises a large measure of control, -and the matter which appears is that which, on -the whole, is agreeable to seigniorial minds. The -coal magnates may be criticised, but it is not so much -on account of their refusal to grant concessions to -their men as for their failure to operate in defiance -of their men. So, too, the trusts come in for occasional -rough handling; but it is the abstract trust -that is at fault: the individual trust usually goes -scathless. Certain of the “yellows” furnish some -exception to the general rule, though here, too, the -influence of the great advertiser is shown, and one -may vainly read the columns of the most radical of the -anti-monopoly dailies for a suggestion that the great<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_146" id="Page_146">[146]</a></span> -department stores are other than abodes of comfort -and joy for all the souls employed therein.</p> - -<p>Such is the newspaper bias, and the product of -the hired writer must conform. Whether editing -news or writing opinions, he must recognize the -divinity that hedges in the magnate class. It was a -savage, and in some respects extravagant, picture of -the function of the hired newspaper worker which a -brilliant journalist, now deceased, gave to the world a -few years ago:—</p> - -<p>“There is no such thing in America as an independent -press, unless it is out in the country towns. -I am paid for keeping honest opinions out of the -paper I am connected with. Other editors are paid -similar salaries for doing similar things. If I should -allow honest opinions to be printed in one issue of -my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation, -like Othello’s, would be gone. The man who would -be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be -out on the street hunting for another job. The -business of a New York journalist is to distort the -truth, lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at -the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his -race for his daily bread, or for about the same thing, -his salary. We are the tools of vassals of the rich -men behind the scenes. We are jumping-jacks. -They pull the strings, and we dance. Our time, our -talents, our lives, our possibilities, are all the property -of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.”</p> - -<p>But though in certain respects extravagant, it has -yet faithful and accurate touches which are recognizable -by every undeluded person who earns his<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_147" id="Page_147">[147]</a></span> -living in the employment of the daily press. Perhaps, -indeed, there are not many of the undeluded; -for the recoil upon themselves of the character of -their tasks does not, to say the least, sharpen the -edge of conscience, and the service of a few years is -generally believed to be effective in indurating the -finest sensibilities.</p> - -<p>It is not, as has been said, so much through their -editorial expressions as through their coloring of the -news that the weeklies and dailies mould the opinions -of the mass. A growing scepticism averts the former -influence; but against the latter there is no prophylactic. -News is assorted, pruned, improved, to accord -with a predetermined policy. From an anti-imperialist -publication one gets small notion of other happenings -in the Philippines than devastations, rapes, -battle, murder, and sudden death; and from an -administration organ one may learn only of Peace -piping her “languid note,” of the diffusion of education, -and the progress of industry, varied only now -and then by slight outbreaks from a few ladrones. -In the far more important matter of the irrepressible -class conflict here at home, like influences color the -news; and as ninety-nine out of every one hundred -periodicals support, in greater or less degree, the -existing régime, the impress upon the public mind is -overwhelming. Some of the “yellows” set up a bar -to the universal pervasion of this influence; and the -activities of the social reformers, through their -weekly journals, their tracts, and their public discussions, -somewhat affect it. But, on the whole, -these effects are but a ripple on the deep and<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_148" id="Page_148">[148]</a></span> -powerful stream that fertilizes the opinions of the -public.</p> - - -<h3>V</h3> - -<p>Our laudatory stump orators have their measure -of influence on social thought, no doubt; but it is -one that surely declines, and the subject may be -passed with but scant mention. Likewise, the heterogeneous -small fry of seigniorial retainers in the -various walks of life, whose business it is, in season -and out, to glorify the prevailing régime, may be -noticed and dismissed in a sentence. The influence -of the pulpit, however, is a subject that requires some -attention. This influence, while greater than that of -either of the groups just mentioned, is unquestionably -less than that of either the editors or the professional -lay publicists. Among practical men in the upper -orders there is a widespread prejudice against pastoral -interference in social and political matters, unless it -be directed solely to seigniorial justification. The -shoemaker should stick to his last, runs the adage; -and no less it is urged that the pastor should stick to -his text. He should, furthermore, discriminate and -sort his texts, making careful avoidance of the ethical -precepts of Jesus. For these are needlessly disturbing -to the code that prevails in commerce and politics, -and both politicians and magnates resent their citation. -A future “popular” version of the Bible may -eliminate them, and thus do away with a fertile cause -of discord; but until that is done the better part of -pastoral valor will continue to lie in discretion.</p> - -<p>The sentiments of the politicians and the magnates<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_149" id="Page_149">[149]</a></span> -toward the pulpit filter down to the common mass of -the laity, and still further weaken pastoral influence. -But weakened as it has been, it is yet felt by the -magnates to be an instrument of social control which -by proper use can be made to perform a needed service. -A constant pressure is, therefore, brought to -bear upon pastoral utterances. It is the “safe” men -who are in most request to fill pulpits; and it is the -“safe” men who draw to their churches the largest -endowments. Under the influence of this pressure -there has gradually been developed a code of pulpit -ethics, outside the limits of which no prudent minister -will dare range. The minister may be “long” on -spirituality, but he must be “short” on social precepts. -He may preach faith, hope, and charity, and -also the future punishment of the unregenerate, so -long as unregeneracy is depicted in general terms; -but he must avoid, with the nicest delicacy, the mention -of tax-dodging and stock-watering as punishable -sins. He may denounce violence, and for a modern -instance he may cite the occasional riotous conduct -of striking workmen; but let him at his peril cite -such venial backslidings from grace as the blowing -up of a competitor’s refinery, the seizure of a street -for track-laying, or the employment of armed mercenaries -for a private purpose. Political evils may be -denounced in the abstract, and the bribery of voters -in the concrete. The latter is an offence usually -committed by irreverent ward politicians, and may -justly receive, without injury to the State and to -society, the scathing anathemas of the pulpit. But -he that in a moment of inadvertence miscalls by the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_150" id="Page_150">[150]</a></span> -name bribes the “gentle rewards,” the “gratuities,” -as they were known in Bacon’s time, which magnates -frequently bestow upon legislators and judges, had -best resign his pastorate and seek some other field. -Nor must any slight be thrown upon any of the conventional -practices in the ordinary daily conduct of -“business.” These are hallowed by custom, and are -beyond criticism. Such a declaration as that of a -certain minister in a recent number of the <cite>Christian -Endeavor World</cite>—“What we call Napoleonic genius -in business is sometimes simply whitewashed highway -robbery on a gigantic scale”—verges closely -upon contumacy. It is relieved slightly by the qualifying -“sometimes,”—much virtue in your “sometimes,” -as the immortal bard would remark,—but for -all that, it is a dangerous utterance, and one apt to -cause its enunciator grave trouble.</p> - -<p>But pastoral pronouncements on social questions -are permitted—nay, welcomed—if only they properly -rebuke the occasional discontent and unquiet of the -masses and the aggression of those foes of order, the -labor unions. Such a pronouncement, for instance, is -that of the Rev. Lyman Abbott, put forth in his -recent philosophical disquisition, “The Rights of -Man.” “Trades-unions ... are ruled over generally,” -he declares, “by a directory scarcely less -absolute than that which governed the revolutionists -in the day of Mirabeau.” This is unexceptionably -decorous, and runs no risk whatever of seigniorial -censorship. The recent coal strike brought forth a -large number of pastoral utterances of a like character, -which must ultimately redound to the great<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_151" id="Page_151">[151]</a></span> -glory of the declaimers. The good Bishop Potter, in -his address before the Diocesan convention in New -York City, September 24, felt called upon to rebuke -envy and hatred and to deny the existence of social -classes in the republic: “Wealth is unequally distributed, -we are told, and the sophistries that are -born of envy and hatred are hawked about the streets -to influence, in a land which refuses to enthrone one -class above another, the passions of the less clever or -thrifty or industrious against those who are more so.” -The eminent Dr. Ethelbert Talbot, Bishop of the -Episcopal Church in Central Pennsylvania, according -to his public letter of September 28, saw in the -coal strike only a demand upon the part of the -miners “that the operators shall no longer manage -their own business.” “How can the question of -whether a man has a right to conduct his own business,” -he asks, with painfully defective forethought -for what subsequently happened, “be submitted to -arbitration?” The no less eminent Rev. Dr. Newell -Dwight Hillis, in his recent address before the -Chicago Society of New York, demanded a wall of -bayonets from Washington to Wilkesbarre. The -Rev. Dr. Minot J. Savage of the Church of the Messiah -also called for arms instead of arbitration, and -the Rev. Dr. W. R. Huntington of Grace Church -echoed the good Bishop Talbot’s opinion, and “from -the point of view of simple justice” could not see -“that we have any reason to blame the mine-owners -for refusing to allow the management of their own -business to be taken out of their hands.” From -Calvary, too,—or at least from the Calvary Baptist<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_152" id="Page_152">[152]</a></span> -Church of New York,—came a further demand for -soldiery. “These labor leaders,” declared the Rev. -Dr. R. S. MacArthur, “with their large salaries, are -forcing the men to be idle. They are more tyrannical -than the Czar of Russia.” These are but samples -of the “safe” utterances on social questions—the -kind that involve no penalties, but on the contrary, -reap sure harvests of glory and recompense.</p> - -<p>Occasionally from too close and exclusive reading -of the synoptic gospels, with their recital of Jesus’ -specific teachings on social matters, a young and ardent -minister loses his perspective, and seeing over-large -the industrial and social evils of his time, seeks -to remedy them. Usually, however, the mood is but -transitory, and a few months, or at most a few years, -witness the reaction. Renunciation of heretical doctrines -follows, and ultimately the errant is restored to -the fold of the “safe.” But let no one imagine that -in seigniorial halls his sins are remembered against -him. On the contrary, there is more joy over the -recovery of one strayed sheep than over ninety and -nine that remain faithful.</p> - -<p>Sometimes, it must be conceded, there are to be -found those who refuse to be forced or cajoled, and -who hold their intrepid way in defiance of power. -The World assails them, in the words of Matthew -Arnold, with its perpetual challenge and warning:—</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> -<div class="stanza"> -<div class="indentquotebase">“‘Behold,’ she cries, ‘so many rages lulled;</div> -<div class="indentbase">So many fiery spirits quite cooled down.</div> -<div class="indentbase">Look how so many valors, long undulled,</div> -<div class="indentbase">After short commerce with me fear my frown.’”</div> -</div></div></div> - -<p>But they fear not her frown; and they teach the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_153" id="Page_153">[153]</a></span> -social precepts of their Master regardless of material -consequences. What those consequences are, the -average man knows full well. They are ostracism, -a reduction, sooner or later, to the poorest livings; a -hemming in and constraining to the narrowest fields -of effort and influence—in a word, the full sum of -the forceful rebuke which it is possible for the magnate -class and its retainers, in the present state of -society, to deliver. In the more developed state -of the future the rebuke will be yet more emphatic; -for the influence of the pulpit, whatever it may be in -degree, must in kind be confirmatory of the right of -the magnate class to rule.</p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"></div><!--Page break for ePub--> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_154" id="Page_154">[154]</a></span></p> - - - - -<h2>CHAPTER VIII<br /> -<span class="titlefont smcap">General Social Changes</span></h2> - - -<p>The historic props of class rule, according to Professor -Edward A. Ross, in his recent volume, “Social -Control,” have been force, superstition, fraud, pomp, -and prescription. Our present seigniorial class -makes use, with fine discrimination as time and -occasion require, of each of these means of support, -though unquestionably it sets the greatest value -upon the last named. Force is employed less -openly, less obviously; decreasingly by the direct -imposition of the magnates, increasingly through -their ingenious manipulation of the powers of the -State. The superstition latent in most minds proves -now, as ever, a means of ready recourse; but though -supernatural sanction to the acts and authority of -the magnates is cunningly deduced and volubly -preached from a thousand pulpits, the prop fails -somewhat as a constant and sure reliance. Even -testimony so authoritative as that of President Baer -to the effect that the Great First Cause had intrusted -to himself and his co-magnates the control of the business -interests of the country, has been flouted in a -number of places. The notion of supernatural -sanctions, as most people know, and as Professor Goldwin -Smith has repeatedly taken pains to point out,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_155" id="Page_155">[155]</a></span> -is losing its hold upon the reason of mankind; and -though it still has, and will ever have, a certain -potency, its best days are passed.</p> - -<p>As for fraud, both of class against class, and individual -against individual, attempts to practise it no -doubt increase; but the tooth-and-claw struggle of -the last generation has developed and sharpened -the wits of the combatants, so that it tends to become -a less profitable game. He would be a sharper -indeed, according to the proverb, who among the -Turks of the Negropont, the Jews of Salonika, or -the Greeks of Athens could cheat his fellow: each -knows by heart all the tricks and devices of which -the others are capable. Matters are not yet at such -a stage in free America: great frauds, both of the -group and of the individual, are still practised. -But the almost infinite possibilities of other days -have been sadly restricted by the operation of those -natural laws which tend to fit beings to their environment. -Pomp, too, is less a factor of control than -in past times. It has a powerful grip on the imaginations -of the poor, as the columns of our “yellow” -journals, which devote so large a space to the ceremonies -of the great, amply attest; but though it -charms the more, it deceives the less. It interests, -it delights; but it does not overawe or subdue.</p> - - -<h3>I</h3> - -<p>It is by prescription—by a constant appeal to the -sanctity of custom, a constant preaching of the validity -of vested rights, and of the beauty, order, inevitability,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_156" id="Page_156">[156]</a></span> -and righteousness of things as they are—that -the magnate class wins to its support the suffrages -of the people. Other influences aid, but this -one is dominant. As Professor Ross pertinently -writes:—</p> - -<p>“Those who have the sunny rooms in the social -edifice have ... a powerful ally in the suggestion -of Things-as-they-are. With the aid of a little narcotizing -teaching and preaching, the denizens of the -cellar may be brought to find their lot proper and -right, to look upon escape as an outrage upon the -rights of other classes, and to spurn with moral indignation -the agitator who would stir them to protest. -Great is the magic of precedent, and like the rebellious -Helots, who cowered at the sight of their masters’ -whips, those who are used to dragging the social -chariot will meekly open their calloused mouths -whenever the bit is offered them.”</p> - -<p>The magnates, as has been shown, brook small -interference with prevailing customs. Their near -dependents, retainers, and “poor relations” think as -they think, and feel as they feel; and the great majority -of the professional moulders of opinion, drawing -their inspiration from above, preach and teach -as the magnates would have them. The general -social passivity following the pressure of all these -influences upon the public mind is as certain and -inescapable as a mathematical conclusion.</p> - - -<h3>II</h3> - -<p>A powerful auxiliary to the preaching of the sanctity -of custom is the extolling of individual “success.”<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_157" id="Page_157">[157]</a></span> -At the very time when socio-industrial processes are -settling to a fixed routine and socio-industrial forms -to a fixed status,—when day by day there is found -less room at the top and more room at the bottom,—the -chorus of exhortation to the men of the land to -bestir themselves reaches its highest pitch. Meddle -not with custom and the law, is the injunction; leave -those to abler and wiser heads—meaning, of course, -the present formulators and manipulators thereof. -Meddle not with things as they are, but while your -companions sleep, “toil upward in the night,” and -carve out a career for yourself among the stars. Put -no faith in general social changes, except such as -result from the combined effect of each unit concerning -himself solely with his own material salvation. -There is no social betterment without precedent individual -betterment, it is urged. “You cannot make -a bad man good by legislation,” is the admonitory -adage, and “You cannot make a poor man rich by -legislation” is its twin. If certain persons hold to -the theory that corrective laws have a definite reaction -upon character, and that in every civilization -worthy the name there are social institutions, founded -in law, which are immeasurably in advance of the -general average of sanity, sobriety, and honesty of -the citizenship, such persons are but dreamers, and -are not to be taken too seriously. So, too, with -the dictum regarding the statutory enhancement of -riches. There are those who insinuate that it is -heard most often from the lips of the industrial magnates, -the majority of whom are living examples of -the fact that riches may be garnered by means of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_158" id="Page_158">[158]</a></span> -tariffs and other privilege-giving laws; and from the -<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">laissez-faire</i> tariff reformers, whose reiterated argument -against protective duties is that they are law-given -privileges by which the few gain wealth at the -expense of the many. But persons who question -this profound adage are unsophisticated. They fail -to discriminate properly. The adage is one which, -like a simile or metaphor, should not be stretched -too far. It has its true and legitimate bearing only -when it is applied to the very poor.</p> - -<p>Personal endeavor toward the goal of “success” -is the urgent exhortation. Scarcely one of the magnates -who have recently entered literature, or who, -avoiding that province, have on occasion unbosomed -themselves to the interviewer, but takes pains to -declare how numerous and how mighty are the possibilities -in the path of the energetic. All that is -needed, according to most of the seigniorial recipes, -are brains and health; honesty, it is true, is often -included as an ingredient in the compound, but its -mention is possibly ironical, and need not concern -us. Brains and health are thus the two things needful; -and though pursuing Satan may gather in, with -his drag-net, a vast army of the hindmost, the fortunate -possessors of these two boons will inevitably -forge to the front in the headlong race.</p> - -<p>It is by no accident that this particular counsel -from the magnates is heard now more frequently -than any other. It is one that of course has been -given in all times; but it has never been given with -such frequency and unction as now. Consciously or -subconsciously, it is an expression of class feeling—a<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_159" id="Page_159">[159]</a></span> -revelation of the community of interests and -purposes of a particular division of our society. In -whatever cases its utterance is prompted by a general -social motive, that motive is the defence of class control. -It is counsel that makes for the acquiescence of -the lower orders and the increased security of the -upper. “The heaving and straining of the wretches -pent up in the hold of the slaver is less,” writes -Professor Ross again, “if now and then a few of the -most redoubtable are let up on deck. Likewise the -admitting of a few brave, talented, or successful commoners -into the charmed circle above has a wonderful -effect in calming the rage and envy of the exploited, -and thereby prolonging the life of the parasitic system.” -This counsel of endeavor, promulgated by the -few who have striven and “succeeded,” is thus a -social sedative of great efficacy.</p> - -<p>The professional moulders of opinion take their cue -from these exhortations of the magnates, improve, -elaborate, and redistribute them. The professors, the -editors, and the orators lead, and the hortatory pronouncements -of the pulpit follow closely. The Carpenter -of Nazareth, it is true, held other views of -“success”; but his precepts would seem to have gone -out of fashion in the fanes and tabernacles ostensibly -devoted to his worship. With all ranks and conditions -Success becomes the great god; and as though there -were not already priests and votaries enough for his -proper worship, a special class of publications has -recently arisen, which serve as his vowed and consecrated -ministers. These teach to the devout but -unsophisticated followers of the great god the particular<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_160" id="Page_160">[160]</a></span> -means best adapted to win his grace; how his -frown may be averted; or, if his anger be kindled, by -what penances and other rites he is to be propitiated. -They chant the praises and recite the life-incidents of -those who have been most conspicuously blessed, and -to all the rest of mankind they shout, “Follow our -counsel, and some day you shall be even like unto -these.” It is a glittering lure, and it is eagerly pursued. -Sometimes, indeed, not without doubts and -misgivings; for a recognition that “all the gates are -thronged with suitors,” that “all the markets overflow,” -and that the settling and hardening of socio-industrial -processes has already begun, becomes more -general, and leads many to essay the trial of fortune’s -pathway only as a desperate and forlorn adventure. -But these are the exceptions; the majority are still -to be caught by limed twigs. The gods denied mankind -many gifts, and attached hard conditions to most -of those which they granted. But for all their withholding -of certain gifts and their tainting of others, -they sought to compensate by giving an extra allowance -of credulity.</p> - - -<h3>III</h3> - -<p>Not only by the showering of precepts, by the encouragement -of individual effort, and by the dangling -of more or less illusory prizes before the wistful multitude -does the ruling class maintain its hold. It invites, -to some extent, a participation in the harvest. -The growth of the shareholding class, of which mention -has already been made, is by no means wholly<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_161" id="Page_161">[161]</a></span> -fortuitous. New companies of small initial capital, -and with somewhat dubious chances in the great -struggle, may be glad enough to market their shares -wheresoever they can; but something of seigniorial -grace and condescension, though not entirely unmixed -with calculating foresight, is apparent in the -opening of opportunities for small investment in the -larger and more stable corporations. Mr. John B. C. -Kershaw, in the <cite>Fortnightly Review</cite> for May, 1900, -gives an interesting account of this fostering of share-investment -in England. The industrial magnates, he -says, saw that the best policy for preventing the -growth of a public sentiment favoring the encroachments -of labor would be to increase the number of -<i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">bourgeoisie</i> interested in industrial affairs. Accordingly -they encouraged popular share-buying, with the -result that “a large and increasing proportion of the -general public is now financially involved in all industrial -struggles, and our manufacturers feel assured -that the danger lest the workers should be backed by -a solid and enthusiastic public opinion in their demands -for shorter hours or increased pay no longer -exists.”</p> - -<p>As in England, so also here. The movement -toward corporate ownership is probably more pronounced -in the United States than in the older country, -and it has been equally encouraged from above. -Joint-stock concerns increased in England from 9344 -in 1885 to 25,267 in 1898. In Massachusetts, the -State in which the preparation of statistics most -nearly approaches the methods of science, corporations -are reported to have increased during the years<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_162" id="Page_162">[162]</a></span> -1885-95 by more than 77 per cent. As for shareholders, -the nine principal manufacturing industries -of Massachusetts for the same period show percentages -of increase ranging from 13.87 in tapestry to -637.74 in leather, saddles, and harness. The entire -country has shown a marked growth in the number -of this class, and it would seem that no one is too -poor to hold a share in some corporation. Indeed, to -read the arguments of the legal retainers of the magnates -in the Income Tax case, and in the various trust -cases that from time to time arise, one would think -that the main body of the shareholders of the nation -was composed of workingmen, widows, and orphans. -In no time since the prophet Ezekiel’s day have there -been uttered words of such tender consideration for -the poor and needy, the widow and the orphan, and -of such bitter denunciation for their would-be despoilers -as were tearfully put forth in opposing the -income tax.</p> - -<p>A great number of shareholders in a particular -company would seem, on first thought, to be something -of a nuisance. Unquestionably they would -represent a wide range of conflicting views and antagonistic -purposes, all bearing upon the one problem of -the proper operation of the company’s property; and -would thus give salient instances of that unwisdom -which is too often found in a multitude of counsellors. -At least this is the seigniorial argument against national -collectivism—an argument which one might -naturally suppose to be quite as applicable to the particular -collectivism of the stock company. But it -does not so apply; the solid advantages of diffused<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_163" id="Page_163">[163]</a></span> -shareholding in assuring general public sanction to the -acts of the magnates outweigh the confusion and -danger which are alleged to lie in public ownership.</p> - -<p>The social and political effect of this general participation -in the ownership of industries may be readily -observed by all but the blind. “If the truth were -known,” wrote that keen-witted financier, Mr. Russell -Sage, in a magazine article published last May, “concentration -of wealth is popular with the masses.” -Partners in the great enterprises, the multitude of -petty shareholders are led more and more to consider -economic questions from the employers’ standpoint. -In the controversies between labor and capital ten -years ago the average citizen was but an onlooker, -sometimes a weak partisan of capital, but very often -a neutral, with a strong latent sympathy for the -“under dog.” To-day, thanks to his holding of a -single share in the steel corporation or of two or three -shares in some street railway company, he is an employer, -one of the men “to whom God, in His infinite -wisdom, has given the control of the property interests -of the country.” He sees, thinks, and feels as a -member, however humble, of the employing class; -and what the magnates think and do is to him all -the law and the prophets. “Bound by gold chains -about the feet” of his feudatory lords, he is at the -same time a sharer in their responsibilities and a faithful -retainer in their service.</p> - - -<h3>IV</h3> - -<p>It would be idle to declare that all the tendencies -make toward acquiescence. Just as in the atmosphere<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_164" id="Page_164">[164]</a></span> -a prevailing drift of the wind is accompanied -by cross currents, flurries, and rotatory motions, so -the dominant tendency discoverable in social industry -is qualified by many complex processes. Of the -cross currents here to be briefly noted, some are but -trifling, while others undoubtedly reveal a certain -force and constancy. A small part of the public is -ever in a state of ferment over imputed social evils, -and at rare times this ferment becomes general. -Recurring labor troubles indicate that the spirit of -resistance, if it really be dying, dies hard. Strikes -of the magnitude of those at Homestead and in the -Tennessee mines in 1892, at Chicago and other railroad -centres in 1894, the several anthracite coal -strikes of 1897, 1900, and 1902, and the steel strike -of 1901 prove that organized labor has not wholly -succumbed to the encompassing forces about it. The -remarkable growth in numbers, these last two years, -of the unions composing the American Federation of -Labor, is confirmatory testimony. Radical political -movements, furthermore, have not been wanting. The -Socialists have increased their voting strength in the -nation from some 2000 ballots in 1888 to upward -of 130,000 in 1900. The Farmers’ Alliance made -tremendous headway in the election of 1890, and its -political successor, the People’s party, secured by -fusion more than 1,000,000 votes in 1892 and nearly -2,000,000 in 1894. “Labor” mayors and even Socialist -mayors have been elected in several cities, and -the polling of 106,721 votes for Samuel M. Jones for -Governor of Ohio in 1899 was a truly remarkable -showing of the residual independence of the citizenship.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_165" id="Page_165">[165]</a></span> -There are also general social movements to -chronicle. Reform societies and clubs are occasionally -heard of; arbitration movements have met with -some favor; there has been a considerable growth -in the number of university and college settlements; -and anti-trust conferences and things of that sort have -frequently met, talked, and dispersed. Indeed, all of -us at times grumble and find fault with general conditions. -Even Mr. Russell Sage, in the face of his -exultant panegyric on the beneficence of combination, -has very recently given to the press a statement -denouncing the further consolidation of industry, and -predicting, in case his words are not heeded, “widespread -revolt of the people and subsequent financial -ruin unequalled in the history of the world.” Though -only a few of us are irreconcilable at all times, all of -us are disaffected sometimes—especially when our -particular interests are pinched. We talk threateningly -of instituting referendums to curb excessive -power, of levying income taxes, or of compelling -the Government to acquire the railroads and the -telegraphs. We subscribe to newspapers and other -publications which criticise the acts of the great corporations, -and we hail as a new Gracchus the ardent -reformer who occasionally comes forth for a season -to do battle for the popular cause.</p> - - -<h3>V</h3> - -<p>It must be confessed, however, that this revolt is, -for the most part, sentimental; it is a mental attitude -only occasionally transmutable into terms of action.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_166" id="Page_166">[166]</a></span> -It is, moreover, sporadic and flickering; it dies out, -after a time, and we revert to our usual moods, concerning -ourselves with our particular interests, and -letting the rest of the world wag as it will. The -specific social reaction of the last few years has been -especially marked. It has shown itself in the weakening -or disruption of radical political movements, in -the more hesitant attitude of the trade-unionists, in -the decline of factory legislation,—in fact, of all -legislation tending to the protection of the weaker -and the regulation of the stronger,—and in a general -feeling of the futility of social effort. The Anti-imperialists -will have it that this admitted reaction -is due to the South African and Philippine wars, to -a lust of empire and a contempt for the rights of -weaker peoples. It is a pretty theory, but unfortunately -it has small basis in chronology. For the reaction -had already become apparent before either -war was waged. The date of its beginning may be -variously guessed at; but it is probable that the time -assigned to it in Chapter V—somewhere within the -two years 1896-97—is not far wrong. Before that -time a very large part of the public could occasionally -be interested in social measures and movements, and -in social literature. Thousands of even the most -hardened philistines read Mr. George’s “Progress -and Poverty,” Mr. Bellamy’s “Looking Backward,” -and Mr. Kidd’s “Social Evolution.” And as for -that minor section of the public, the social reformers, -there was then to be found among them a -radicalism of belief, a definiteness of aim, an ardency -and determination of spirit that are sadly wanting<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_167" id="Page_167">[167]</a></span> -now. Doubtless to every one of these, as he ruefully -compares the two periods, there recurs the sentiment -of the Wordsworthian recollection,—</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> -<div class="poetry"> -<div class="stanza"> -<div class="indentquotebase">“Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive,</div> -<div class="indentbase">But to be young was very heaven.”</div> -</div></div></div> - -<p>While in the bosom of every devotee of Things-as-they-are -there rises the sentiment of thankfulness -that the mass of the people have learned the wisdom -of letting well enough alone.</p> - -<p>Political radicalism reached its culminating point -in the election of 1896. Despite certain foolish and -mischievous notions embodied in the two radical platforms -of that year, the combined movement was yet -a consistent and unified attack upon class rule. The -elections of the next two years revealed a waning -of Populist and Democratic strength, and in 1900 -a fine sense of caution prompted the Fusionists to -subordinate the industrial demands of their platforms -to the issue of Imperialism. The Socialists, it is true, -usually increase their vote; but the admitted fact of -a great growth of Socialist conviction throughout the -land makes these slight increases at the polls appear -but trivial, and only further confirms the view that -such radicalism is sentimental rather than potential. -Anti-trust conferences are not without an element of -humor; at least, they are the cause of much humor -in outsiders; and the widely heralded arbitration -court of the National Civic Federation breaks down -on the very occasion when most is expected of it—that -of the anthracite coal strike. Organized labor, -despite its greater numerical strength, is far less aggressive<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_168" id="Page_168">[168]</a></span> -than of old; and except in isolated instances, -it observes a caution which would have further distinguished -Fabius. As for the growth of college -settlements, the fact is only an added proof of reaction. -They do a great good, unquestionably; but -their basis is philanthropy and not social adjustment.</p> - -<p>As a people, we have heard enough, for the time, -about social problems, and prefer to interest ourselves -in other matters. Professor Walter A. Wyckoff, who -has recently changed the scene of his optimistic observances -from America to England, has an article -in the September <cite>Scribner’s</cite> on the English social situation. -“The condition-of-the-people problem,” he -writes, “lacks vitality for the moment because, as -one shrewd observer remarked, ‘the public has grown -tired of the poor.’” We are feeling the same weariness -here. Our benevolence somewhat increases, -and we are willing to give, and more than willing that -the magnates shall give freely; but we want to be -troubled no more with remedial schemes. Rather, -we are disposed to trust to seigniorial wisdom and -virtue to set things right. Some of us will perhaps -decline to go so far in our trust as a certain prominent -Massachusetts lady who proposed to abolish working-class -suffrage. “I think,” said this lady in an -address to a club of working girls, “many of the -troubles between employer and men might be swept -away if the men could not vote. If he felt that they -did not stand on just the same footing as himself, -that they had not quite so many privileges as he, -the employer might have a chivalric feeling toward -them.” Some of us may hesitate at this project, but<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_169" id="Page_169">[169]</a></span> -withal we are willing to trust largely to seigniorial -guidance.</p> - -<p>Instead of the personal fidelity that characterized -the older Feudalism, we are rapidly developing a -class fidelity. History may repeat itself, as the adage -runs; but not by identical forms and events. It is not -likely that personal fidelity, as once known, can ever -be restored: the long period of dislodgment from the -land, the diffusion of learning, the exercise of the -franchise, and the training in individual effort have -left a seemingly unbridgeable chasm between the past -and the present forms. But though personal fidelity, -in the old sense, is improbable, group fidelity, founded -upon the conscious dependence of a class, is already -observable, and it grows apace. Out of the sense of -class dependence arises the extreme deference which -we yield, the rapt homage which we pay—not as -individuals, but as units of a class—to the men of -wealth. We do not know them personally, and we -have no sense of personal attachment. But in most -things we grant them priority. We send them or -their legates to the Senate to make our laws; we -permit them to name our administrators and our -judiciary; we listen with eager attention to their -utterances, and we abide by their judgment. When the -venerable Mr. Hewitt, brought forth like the holy -man Onias, in the Judean civil war between Aristobulus -and Hyrcanus, to denounce the opposing -faction, utters his anathema against the minions of -Mr. Mitchell, we listen in awe and are convinced. -A three-line interview with the chief of the magnates -is read with an eagerness wholly wanting in our perusal<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_170" id="Page_170">[170]</a></span> -of an official pronunciamento by the most strenuous -of Presidents. Our racial sense of humor, it -must be confessed, saves us from the more slavish -forms of deference; we jest about solemn themes and -take in vain the names of great beings. Even the -name of the great magnate is more or less humorously -played upon; and our latest national pastime of “trust-busting” -reveals a like levity, though an innocent one. -It shows, moreover, how far we have reacted from -our Puritan forefathers. For it is pursued not on -account of the pain it gives the trusts, but for the -harmless pleasure it gives both participants and spectators. -But our subserviency, though less formal than -that of old, is withal more real and fundamental.</p> - - -<h3>VI</h3> - -<p>Current passivity has, however, a reverse side. To -many persons a recognition of the changing conditions -brings demoralization or despair. All are not -won by the lure of “success.” To an increasing -number the dangling prize in the distance is but a -mirage, and oppressed by a sense of the bankruptcy -of life they seek an oblivious relief. There is a drift -toward the twin dissipations of drink and gambling, -and there is an increase of suicide. The greater -drink consumption is a matter of common observation, -and it is amply attested by statistics. Mr. J. -Holt Schooling’s figures in a recent issue of the -<cite>Fortnightly Review</cite> show an increased consumption -in the United States of 20 per cent for the years -1896-1900, as against the years 1886-90. The<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_171" id="Page_171">[171]</a></span> -percentage of increase is slightly less than that of -those industrially exploited nations, Germany and -France, but considerably more than that of Great -Britain and Ireland. The annual figures published -in the <cite>World Almanac</cite> for 1902 give more pertinent -lessons. The unsettled and troublous year, 1893, -witnessed an enormous increase in drink consumption; -but the succeeding hard times of 1894 and 1895, -when drink-money was increasingly hard to obtain, -induced a greater sobriety. With 1896 drinking became -more general, or at least more energetic; and -except for a slight falling off in 1899, the consumption -of liquors and wines has risen steadily, reaching -the enormous total of 1,349,176,033 gallons in 1900. -Much of this gain is confined to beer, the cheapest -of alcoholic beverages; but there has also been a -phenomenal increase in the consumption of spirits. -From 71,051,877 gallons consumed in 1896 there has -been a steady annual rise to the total of 97,248,382 -gallons in 1900, a gain of 36.8 per cent.</p> - -<p>The recent increase of petty gambling is still more -noticeable. Playing for high stakes, a custom common -enough in the late years of the eighteenth century -and the early years of the nineteenth, has long -been given over or transferred to the domain of -“business.” But what is colloquially known as “tin-horn” -gambling has advanced, these last five years, -by leaps and bounds. Doubtless the high precedent -of our national Monte Carlos, the stock exchanges, is -ample cause for much of it; but other causes are also -in operation. With those persons that hearken to, -but heed not, the seigniorial exhortation to bestir<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_172" id="Page_172">[172]</a></span> -themselves and conquer “success,” petty gambling -is an expression of unbelief. They know that the -prizes advertised in the great industrial game are not -to be won; they see nothing ahead but a dull routine -of poorly remunerated labor, and they turn to gambling -partly for recreation and partly for profit. With -those, on the other hand, who not only hearken but -heed, gambling is merely the application of their ambitious -plans to the branch of industry which promises, -however vainly, the most immediate returns.</p> - -<p>Faro, keno, and roulette may have suffered some -decline in favor. If so, statutes and the police, instead -of a growing aversion to gambling, must be -held responsible. It is one of those conventional -puzzles which none can explain, that it is possible in -our cities to restrict table and wheel gambling, but -seemingly impossible to restrict certain other forms. -Poker, for instance, maintains its hold, unawed by -statute and unhampered by authority; while policy -and race-betting, the special refuges of the desperately -poor and the desperately fatuous, win new and -lasting converts day by day. Indeed, the growth of -race-betting is one of the striking phenomena of our -time. It has become a habit, a disease; and its confirmed -victims are held in as slavish a thraldom as -are the victims of opium and hasheesh. One need -not penetrate to a pool-room or journey to a race-track -to discover evidences of its general diffusion. -He may hear of it on every side, and he may find definitive -proof in the daily journals. In nearly all of -these the space given to the reports of races, the lists -of betting odds and accounts of great winnings, is generous;<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_173" id="Page_173">[173]</a></span> -and in some three or four of the metropolitan -dailies the subject rises to the rank of a specialty. -The flaunting advertisements of the “tipsters” in one -of these newspapers rival in extent of space used -and opulence of bargains offered, the announcements -of the dry-goods merchants. The glittering lures -dangled before the multitude by the seigniors seem -trivial by comparison. Uncertain, and at best remote, -they prove no match for the near-at-hand -prizes to be won in gambling; and as a consequence -tens of thousands pin their hope of “success” in this -world to a series of fortunate winnings.</p> - -<p>The meaning of the increase of suicide is clouded -by a number of factors, and it is impossible to ascribe -the tendency to one cause alone. Were we to accept -the explanation of the pulpit, we should see in it the -awful consequences of the decline of faith. Pathologists, -however, while not denying this influence, -enumerate many others. Racial and temperamental -factors, drink and vice, are all concerned in the -matter, and even climates and seasons are influential. -But whatever the effect of these may be, the intensifying -struggle for life these last few years, and what -appears to many minds a darkening outlook for the -future, must be acknowledged as powerful agents in -increasing the rate of self-destruction. The rate is -highest in the great industrial centres, where the -struggle is fiercest, where the richest stakes are won -and lost, where luxury is most flaunting and poverty -most galling; and it is least where the struggle is in -some measure relaxed. The recent census shows for -the decade an increased rate per 100,000 of population<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_174" id="Page_174">[174]</a></span> -from 8.8 to 9.9 in the States where registration -of deaths is required, from 11 to 12.7 in registration -cities, and from 10.3 to 11.8 for the entire registration -record. There are a few anomalies in the figures -which are difficult of explanation; the workaday cities -of Fall River and Allegheny have low rates of suicide, -the residence city of Los Angeles a high rate, -while San Francisco reveals the abnormal rate of 49 -per 100,000. With all allowances, however, the rule -holds good: the more distinctly industrial and commercial -cities have remarkably high rates, the less -distinctly industrial and commercial cities remarkably -low rates. In the first group are Chicago, with a rate -of 21.8; Milwaukee, 21; St. Louis, 19.1; Boston, 14.4; -Cincinnati, 13.5; New York, 13.1; Philadelphia, 12.2; -Baltimore, 12; Pittsburg, 9.3. In the second group -may be instanced Atlanta, with a rate of 6.6; Denver, -6; Albany, 3.2; Hartford, 1.3; Richmond, 1.2. These -suicides are the unfit, say the complacent philosophers -of the day, and are quite as well off dead as alive; -but they prove at least that some slight qualification -is needed to Professor Sumner’s optimistic generalization -that “an air of contentment and enthusiastic -cheerfulness ... characterizes our society.” The winners -in the race are doubtless enthusiastically cheerful, -and the great mass that keeps steadily on, fed by -the delusion of ultimate “success,” are at least cheerful -without enthusiasm; but back of these are the -losers and the many who have seen the hollowness -of the world’s promise, whose outlook upon life is one -of intensifying despair.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_175" id="Page_175">[175]</a></span></p> - - -<h3>VII</h3> - -<p>All of our general institutions reflect the changes -in public thought, taste, and feeling consequent upon -the changing conditions of the social régime. But on -none of them are these changes writ more clearly or -in larger characters than on the institution of letters. -Along with the morganization of industry steadily -proceeds the munseyization of literature. We are a -free people, our politicians tell us, and are strenuously -resolved to remain so. But if we are to be -judged by our popular literature, the verdict can -hardly be other than that we have reached an advanced -stage of subserviency, and that the normal -mood of the overwhelming majority is one of complacence -with its lot. Our popular magazines regularly -keep before us a justification, actual or inferential, -of things as they are; and though it is couched in less -argumentative phrasing than that of the newspapers, -it is, no doubt, for that very reason, a more plausible -and effective expression of the plea. There are -panegyrics on our captains of industry, tales of their -exploits in the great industrial battle, descriptions of -their town-houses and country-seats,—all, in fact, -that makes for the emulation of their wisdom and -virtues, and particularly of their faculty of acquisitiveness,—with -a multitude of recipes for the winning of -“success.” Along with this is provided a vaudeville -of idle entertainment: wonder tales, short stories, a -gallery of pictures of stage-folk, who, whatever their -merits may be, bear but a problematic relation to -literature; and finally an amorphous compound of<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_176" id="Page_176">[176]</a></span> -sedative miscellany that not only charms the mind -from serious thinking, but in time paralyzes the very -power of thought.</p> - -<p>Such of these publications as indulge in the gentle -art of reviewing give further evidence of changing -conditions. Reviewing, as now practised, studies the -amenities of life, with a particular regard for the -counting office, “wherein doth sit the dread and -fear” of the publisher who has advertising to distribute. -With a few notable exceptions the reviewing -journals make it their business to be “nice.” They -do not damn, not even with faint praise; they commend -or extol. It is not that they praise insincerely -a bad book—reviewing is too highly developed a -craft for such crudity. But in a bad book all that -the widest exercise of charity can pronounce even -passably good comes in for praise; and what is weak -or poor, or inclusive under old John Dennis’s favorite -term of “clotted nonsense,” is mercifully omitted -from mention. So it is when the advertising publisher -is a factor in the game. But a reviewing journal -must uphold a reputation for impartial judgment, -and must thus mingle blame with praise. Its opportunity -comes when some inglorious Milton of Penobscot -or Butte prints his verses at home at his own -expense. A copy drifts into the reviewing office and -effects a transformation. The angelic temper upon -which so many and such large drafts are made -becomes exhausted, and the humble poet is treated -to the sort of thing which Gifford used to deal out to -the Della Cruscans and the ireful Dennis to the -poetasters of Queen Anne’s time. It was perhaps<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_177" id="Page_177">[177]</a></span> -the last regret of the late J. Gordon Coogler, of -Columbia, S.C., that instead of printing his amiable -verses on his own press, he had not guaranteed the -cost of their production, and secured their publication -by a metropolitan firm.</p> - -<p>The literary distinction of former days has taken -wings. Whether or not Wordsworth was right in his -lament over the state of England in 1803 may be -questioned; but a like lament uttered for our own -land and time would be in large part justified. We -have the two extremes of exceedingly plain living -and of wildly extravagant living; but high thinking -seems to be the accompaniment of neither. For -several years the only really salable books have been -novels, and among these popular favor has centred -almost wholly on the kind called historical—called so -not because the stories bear any relation to history, -but because in them the action is put in a past time. -Lately, it is true, there have been signs of a reaction; -but let none imagine that it is due to a growing taste -for stronger meat. Rather it is an evidence that in -our love of novelty we have tired of one trifle and -now demand another in its stead.</p> - -<p>For the recent indications of declining favor for -the historical novel are accompanied by no signs of -reviving favor for more serious works. The Huxley -Memoirs, it is true, unexpectedly achieved the degree -of favor usually given to a fifth-rate novel; but the -work, despite its science, philosophy, and religious -controversy, was yet an entertaining story, and won -its way for that reason. No more in fiction than in -other branches of literature is there promise of better<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_178" id="Page_178">[178]</a></span> -things. Even the “problem” novel, which, though -often crude or hysterical, was yet an attempt to deal -with some of the deeper facts of life, has been banished, -and is not to be permitted to return. “Our -publishers,” says the well-known literary supplement -of a New York daily newspaper, “are seeking on all -sides for wholesome stories, dealing optimistically -with life, and reaching happy conclusions.” It is a -true judgment, and reveals most clearly the present -standards of public taste.</p> - -<p>Our popular magazines most accurately reflect the -public mind. Pictures and stories are the substance -of its childish delight. Among periodicals we have -nothing in any way comparable to the <cite>Edinburgh</cite>, the -<cite>Quarterly</cite>, the <cite>Nineteenth Century</cite>, the <cite>Fortnightly</cite>, the -<cite>Contemporary</cite>, the <cite>Athenæum</cite>, the <cite>Spectator</cite>, the <cite>Saturday -Review</cite>, or even the <cite>Academy</cite>. Whatever tendencies -of late have seemed to indicate the future planting -of such reviews on these shores, have very recently -been extinguished. Of three publications in which articles -of some thought and some importance were occasionally -printed, two have recently found a monthly -issue more frequent than the public taste required, -and have accordingly transformed themselves into -quarterlies, while the third has been forced to make -concessions to the general demand for “lightness -and brightness.” For these are the qualities which -pay. “Make it light and bright,” is the order which -the literary contributor hears in the editorial offices -when he submits his wares; and though the terms -may be variously interpreted, he understands what -is meant: he must write down to the level of childish<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_179" id="Page_179">[179]</a></span> -minds and complacent natures. Accordingly, he -writes so, to the best of his ability, and so, to that -limit, do all his fellows. The collective result is seen -in the character of the greater number of our books, -our magazines, our Saturday and Sunday supplements. -On all sides is poured forth a flood of print -which deludes the hope or flatters the vanity of the -mass, and which insures a state of mental subserviency,—the -necessary requisite of the economic subserviency -imposed by the ruling class.</p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"></div><!--Page break for ePub--> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_180" id="Page_180">[180]</a></span></p> - - - - -<h2>CHAPTER IX<br /> -<span class="titlefont smcap">Transition and Fulfilment</span></h2> - - -<p>Upon all the heterogeneous but coalescing units -of the social mass the group of magnates imposes -its collective will. There are still disputes and rivalries -among the rulers, and may ever be; but these -are for the most part minor differences, to be settled -among themselves and their mutual arbitrators, the -judges, and qualify in no way the facts of a recognized -community of interests and of collective purposes -and plans. Whatever the individual rivalries, -they result in no deliberate betrayal of class interest; -practically every magnate maintains, at all hazards, -his fidelity to the group. A sense of group honor -may in most instances prompt this fidelity, but a -lively sense of apprehension is also influential. For -should any magnate become possessed of heretical -notions, and thereupon make common cause with the -public against a particular interest of his class, he -would by that act banish himself from communion -with his fellows, and jeopard his possessions to the -last dime. There is, as every one knows, a definite -seigniorial resolve that no strike of workmen on transportation -lines or in public utilities shall succeed; -and when such a strike occurs, every resource of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_181" id="Page_181">[181]</a></span> -magnate class is brought to bear to resist and defeat -it. Often there are attendant circumstances which -might tempt a rival, for his own interests, to interfere -on behalf of the workers. But the thing is never -done; and he who should do it would declass himself -as effectually as a mediæval nobleman would have -done by enlisting in a peasants’ rebellion. There is, -furthermore, a definite seigniorial determination to -withstand to the utmost the agitation for public ownership; -every magnate, with his intellectual retainers -behind him, makes of himself a modern Stonewall -Jackson in resistance to this movement. Here, again, -industrial rivalry might at times prompt a desertion -to the public cause. But there is no such case; -here, as elsewhere, the ruling class maintains its -integrity. As is known, great strikes are sometimes -won; and occasionally, in isolated places, an -advance is made in the direction of public ownership. -But neither is accomplished through desertions in the -seigniorial group, and the instances prove only that -its rule has not yet become supreme.</p> - - -<h3>I</h3> - -<p>The new Feudalism will be but an orderly outgrowth -of present tendencies and conditions. All societies -evolve naturally out of their predecessors. In sociology, -as in biology, there is no cell without a parent -cell. The society of each generation develops a multitude -of spontaneous and acquired variations, and -out of these, by a blending process of natural and -conscious selection, the succeeding society is evolved.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_182" id="Page_182">[182]</a></span> -The new order will differ in no important respects -from the present, except in the completer development -of its more salient features. The visitor from -another planet who had known the old and should -see the new would note but few changes. <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Alter et -idem</i>—another yet the same—he would say. From -magnate to baron, from workman to villein, from -publicist to court agent and retainer, will be changes -of state and function so slight as to elude all but the -keenest eyes.</p> - -<p>An increased power, a more concentrated control, -will be seen. But these have their limitations, which -must not be disregarded. A sense of the latent -strength of democracy will restrain the full exercise -of baronial powers, and a growing sense of ethics -will guide baronial activities somewhat toward the -channels of social betterment. For democracy will -endure, in spite of the new order. “Like death,” -said Disraeli, “it gives back nothing.” Something -of its substance it gives back, it must be confessed; -but of its outer forms it yields nothing, and thus it -retains the potentiality of exerting its will in whatever -direction it may see fit. And this fact, though now -but feebly recognized, will be better understood as time -runs on, and the barons will bear in mind the limit of -popular patience. It is an elastic limit, of a truth; -for the mass of mankind are more ready to endure -known ills than to fly to others that they know not. -It is a limit which, to be heeded, needs only to be -carefully studied. Macaulay’s famous dictum, that -the privileged classes, when their rule is threatened, -always bring about their own ruin by making further<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_183" id="Page_183">[183]</a></span> -exactions, is likely, in this case, to prove untrue. A -wiser forethought begins to prevail among the autocrats -of to-day—a forethought destined to grow and -expand and to prove of inestimable value when bequeathed -to their successors. Our nobility will thus -temper their exactions to an endurable limit; and -they will distribute benefits to a degree that makes a -tolerant, if not a satisfied, people. They may even -make a working principle of Bentham’s maxim, and -after, of course, appropriating the first and choicest -fruits of industry to themselves, may seek to promote -the “greatest happiness of the greatest number.” -For therein will lie their greater security.</p> - -<p>The Positivists, in their prediction of social changes, -give us the phrase, “the moralization of capital,” -and some of the more hopeful theologians, not to -be outdone, have prophesied “the Christianization of -capital.” So far there is not much to be said confirmatory -of either expectation. Yet it is not to be denied -that the faint stirrings of an ethical sense are -observable among the men of millions, and that the -principle of the “trusteeship of great wealth” has -won a number of adherents. The enormous benefactions -for social purposes, the construction of “model -workshops” and “model villages,” though in many -cases prompted by self-interest and in others by a -love of ostentation, are at least sometimes due to a -new sense of social responsibility. A duty to society -has been apprehended, and these are its first -fruits. It is a duty, true enough, which is but dimly -seen and imperfectly fulfilled. The greater part of -these benefactions, as has already been pointed out, is<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_184" id="Page_184">[184]</a></span> -directed to purposes which have but a slight or indirect -bearing upon the relief of social distress, the restraint -of injustice, or the mitigation of remediable -hardships. The giving is even often economically -false, and if carried to an extreme would prove disastrous -to the community; for in many cases it is a -transmutation of wealth from a status of active capital, -wherein it makes possible a greater diffusion of -comfort, to a status of comparative sterility. But, -though often mistaken as is the conception and futile -the fulfilment of this duty, the fact that it is apprehended -at all is one of considerable importance, and -one that carries the promise of baronial security in -the days to come.</p> - - -<h3>II</h3> - -<p>Bondage to the land was the basis of villeinage in -the old régime; bondage to the job will be the basis -of villeinage in the new. The new régime, absolving -itself from all general responsibility to its workers, -extends a measure of protection, solely as an act of -grace, only to those who are faithful and obedient; -and it holds the entire mass of its employed underlings -to the terms of day-by-day service. The growth -of industries has overshadowed the importance of -agriculture, which is ever being pushed back into the -West and into other and remote countries; and the -new order finds its larger interests and its greater -measure of control in the workshops rather than on -the farms. The oil wells, the mines, the grain fields, -the forests, and the great thoroughfares of the land -are its ultimate sources of revenue; but its strongholds<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_185" id="Page_185">[185]</a></span> -are in the cities. It is in these centres of -activity, with their warehouses, where the harvests -are hoarded; their workshops, where the metals and -woods are fashioned into articles of use; their great -distributing houses; their exchanges; their enormously -valuable franchises to be had for the asking -or the seizing, and their pressure of population, -which forces an hourly increase in the exorbitant -value of land, that the new Feudalism finds the field -best adapted for its main operations.</p> - -<p>Bondage to the job will be the basis of the new -villeinage. The wage-system will endure, for it is a -simpler and more effective means of determining the -baron’s volume of profits than were the “boon-works,” -the “week-works,” and the <i lang="fr" xml:lang="fr">corvées</i> of old. But with -increasing concentration on the one hand, and the -fiercer competition for employment on the other, the -secured job will become the laborer’s fortress, which -he will hardly dare to evacuate. The hope of bettering -his condition by surrendering one place in the -expectation of getting another will be qualified by a -restraining prudence. He will no longer trust his -individual strength, but when he protests against ill -conditions, or, in the last resort, strikes, it will be -only in company with a formidable host of his fellows. -And even the collective assertion of his -demands will be restrained more and more as he -considers the constantly recurring failures of his -efforts. Moreover, concentration gives opportunity -for an almost indefinite extension of the black-list: -a person of offensive activity may be denied work -in every feudal shop and on every feudal farm from<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_186" id="Page_186">[186]</a></span> -one end of the country to the other. He will be a -hardy and reckless industrial villein indeed who will -dare incur the enmity of the Duke of the Oil Trust -when he knows that his actions will be promptly -communicated to the banded autocracy of dukes, -earls, and marquises of the steel, coal, iron, window -glass, lumber, and traffic industries.</p> - -<p>There were three under-classes in the old Feudalism,—free -tenants, villeins, and cotters. The number -of tenants on the farms has approximately doubled -in the last twenty years, while in the great cities -nearly the whole population are tenants. The cotters, -with their little huts and small holdings in isolated -places about the margin of cultivation, are also in -process of restoration. The villeins are an already -existent class, more numerous proportionately than -ever before, though the exact status of their villeinage -is yet to be fixed. But modern society is characterized -by complexities unknown in any of its predecessors, -and the specialization of functions requires a -greater number of subordinate classes. It is a difficult -task properly to differentiate them. They shade -off almost imperceptibly into one another; and the -dynamic processes of modern industry often hurl, in -one mighty convulsion, great bodies of individuals -from a higher to a lower class, blurring or obscuring -the lines of demarcation. Nevertheless, to take a -figure from geology, these convulsions become less -and less frequent as the substratum of industrial -processes becomes more fixed and regular; the classes -become more stable and show more distinct differences, -and they will tend, under the new régime, to<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_187" id="Page_187">[187]</a></span> -the formal institution of graded caste. At the bottom -are the wastrels, at the top the barons; and the gradation, -when the new régime shall have become fully -developed, whole and perfect in its parts, will be -about as follows:—</p> - -<p>I. The barons, graded on the basis of possessions.</p> - -<p>II. The court agents and retainers.</p> - -<p>III. The workers in pure and applied science, -artists and physicians.</p> - -<p>IV. The entrepreneurs, the managers of the great -industries, transformed into a salaried class.</p> - -<p>V. The foremen and superintendents. This class -has heretofore been recruited largely from the skilled -workers, but with the growth of technical education -in schools and colleges, and the development of fixed -caste, it is likely to become entirely differentiated.</p> - -<p>VI. The villeins of the cities and towns, more or -less regularly employed, who do skilled work and are -partially protected by organization.</p> - -<p>VII. The villeins of the cities and towns who do -unskilled work and are unprotected by organization. -They will comprise the laborers, domestics, and clerks.</p> - -<p>VIII. The villeins of the manorial estates, of the -great farms, the mines, and the forests.</p> - -<p>IX. The small-unit farmers (land owning), the -petty tradesmen, and manufacturers.</p> - -<p>X. The subtenants on the manorial estates and -great farms (corresponding to the class of “free -tenants” in the old Feudalism).</p> - -<p>XI. The cotters.</p> - -<p>XII. The tramps, the occasionally employed, the -unemployed—the wastrels of city and country.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_188" id="Page_188">[188]</a></span></p> - -<p>The principle of gradation is the only one that can -properly be applied. It is the relative degree of comfort—material, -moral, and intellectual—which each -class directly contributes to the nobility. The wastrels -contribute least, and they are the lowest. The -under-classes who do the hard work lay the basis of -all wealth, but their contribution to the barons is indirect, -and comes to its final goal through intermediate -hands. The foremen and superintendents rightly hold -a more elevated rank, and the entrepreneurs, who directly -contribute most of the purely material comfort, -will be found well up toward the top. Farther up in -the social scale, partly from æsthetic and partly from -utilitarian considerations, will be the scientists and artists. -The new Feudalism, like most autocracies, will -foster not only the arts, but also certain kinds of learning—particularly -the kinds which are unlikely to disturb -the minds of the multitude. A future Marsh or -Cope or Le Conte will be liberally patronized and left -free to discover what he will; and so, too, an Edison or -a Marconi. Only they must not meddle with anything -relating to social science. For obvious reasons, also, -physicians will occupy a position of honor and comparative -freedom under the new régime.</p> - -<p>But higher yet is the rank of the court agents and -retainers. This class will include the editors of “respectable” -and “safe” newspapers, the pastors of -“conservative” and “wealthy” churches, the professors -and teachers in endowed colleges and schools, -lawyers generally, and most judges and politicians. -During the transition period there will be a gradual -elimination of the more unserviceable of these persons,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_189" id="Page_189">[189]</a></span> -with the result that in the end this class will be largely -transformed. The individual security of place and -livelihood of its members will then depend on the -harmony of their utterances and acts with the wishes -of the great nobles. Theirs, in a sense, will be the -most important function in the State—“to justify the -ways of God [and the nobility] to man.” They will -be the safeguards of the realm, the assuagers of popular -suspicion and discontent. So long as they rightly -fulfil their functions, their recompense will be generous; -but such of them as have not the tact or fidelity -to do or say what is expected of them will be -promptly forced into class XI or XII, or, in extreme -cases, banished from all classes, to become the wretched -pariahs of society. At times two divisions of this class -will find life rather a burdensome travail. They are -the judges and the politicians. Holding their places -at once by popular election and by the grace of the -barons, they will be fated to a constant see-saw of -conflicting obligations. They must, in some measure, -satisfy the demands of the multitude, and yet, on the -other hand, they must obey the commands from above.</p> - - -<h3>III</h3> - -<p>Through all the various activities of these classes -(except the wastrels and the cotters) our Benevolent -Feudalism will carry on the Nation’s work. The full -measure of profit is its aim; and having the substance -of its desire, it shows a utilitarian scorn of the mummeries -and ceremonials by which the overlordship of -other days was formally acknowledged. The ancient<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_190" id="Page_190">[190]</a></span> -ceremony of “homage,” the swearing of personal -fidelity to the lord, is relaxed into the mere beseeching -of the foreman for work. Directness and efficacy -characterize its methods. The wage-system, with its -mechanical simplicity, continuing in force, there is an -absence of the old exactions of special work. A mere -altering of the wage-scale appropriates to the noble -whatever share of the product he feels he may safely -demand for himself. Thus “week-work,” the three -or four days’ toil in each week which the villein had -to give unrecompensed to the lord, and “boon-work,” -the several days of extra toil three or four times a -year, will never be revived. Even the company -store, the modern form of feudal exaction, will in time -be given up, for at best it is but a clumsy and offensive -makeshift, and defter and less irritating means -are at hand for reaching the same result. There will -hardly be a restoration of “relief,” the payment of a -year’s dues on inheriting an allotment of land, or of -“heriot,” the payment of a valuable gift from the -possessions of a deceased relative. Indeed, these -tithes may not be worth the bother of collecting; for -the villein’s inheritance will probably be but moderate, -as befits his state and the place which God and -the nobility have ordained for him.</p> - -<p>Practically all industry will be regulated in terms -of wages, and the entrepreneurs, who will then have -become the chief salaried officers of the nobles, will calculate -to a hair the needful production for each year. -Waste and other losses will thus be reduced to a -minimum. A vast scheme of exact systematization -will have taken the place of the old competitive<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_191" id="Page_191">[191]</a></span> -chaos, and industry will be carried on as by clock-work. -The workshops will be conducted practically -as now. Only they will be very much larger, the -individual and total output will be greater, the unit -cost of production will be lessened. Wages and hours -will for a time continue on something like the present -level; but, despite the persistence of the unions, no -considerable gains in behalf of labor are to be expected, -except such as are freely given as acts of -baronial grace and benevolence. The owners of all -industry worth owning, the barons will laugh at -threats of striking and boycotting. No competitor -will be permitted to make capital out of the labor -disputes of another. There may or may not be competitors. -A gigantic merger of all interests, governed -by a council of ten, may supplant the individual dukedoms -and baronies in the different industries, or these -may continue as now, the sovereign units of a federated -whole. But in neither case can labor carry its -point against them. Nevertheless, dissatisfaction -must be guarded against as a possible menace to the -régime. Wages and dividends will be nicely balanced -with a watchful regard for the fostering of content; -workshops and villages of yet more approved models -than any of the present will be built, and a thousand -Pelzers and Pullmans will arise. Old-age pensions, -or at least the promise of them, will be extended to -new groups, and by all possible means the lesson that -protection and security are due only to faithfulness and -obedience will be made plain to the entire villein class.</p> - -<p>Gradually a change will take place in the aspirations -and conduct of the younger generations. Heretofore<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_192" id="Page_192">[192]</a></span> -there has been at least some degree of freedom -of choice in determining one’s occupation, however -much that freedom has been curtailed by actual -economic conditions. But with the settling of industrial -processes comes more and more constraint. The -dream of the children of the farms to escape from -their drudgery by migrating to the city, and from -the stepping-stone of a clerkly place at three dollars -a week to rise to affluence, will be given over, and -they will follow the footsteps of their fathers. A like -fixity of condition will be observed in the cities, and -the sons of clerks and of mechanics and of day -laborers will tend to accept their environment of birth -and training and abide by it. It is a phenomenon -observable in all countries where the economic pressure -is severe, and it is yet more certain to obtain in -feudal America.</p> - - -<h3>IV</h3> - -<p>The outlines of the present State loom but feebly -through the intricate network of the new system. -The nobles will have attained to complete power, and -the motive and operation of government will have -become simply the registering and administering of -their collective will. And yet the State will continue -very much as now, just as the form and name of the -Roman Republic continued under Augustus. The -present State machinery is admirably adapted for -the subtle and extra-legal exertion of power by an -autocracy; and while improvements to that end might -unquestionably be made, the barons will hesitate to take -action which will needlessly arouse popular suspicions.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_193" id="Page_193">[193]</a></span> -From petty constable to Supreme Court Justice the -officials will understand, or be made to understand, the -golden mean of their duties; and except for an -occasional rascally Jacobin, whom it may for a time -be difficult to suppress, they will be faithful and obey.</p> - -<p>The manorial courts, with powers exercised by the -local lords, will not, as a rule, be restored. Probably -the “court baron,” for determining tenantry and -wage-questions, will be revived. It may even come -as a natural outgrowth of the present conciliation -boards, with a successor of the Committee of Thirty-six -of the National Civic Federation as a sort of general -court baron for the nation. But the “court leet,” -the manorial institution for punishing misdemeanors, -wherein the baron holds his powers by special grant -from the central authority of the State, we shall never -know again. It is far simpler and will be less disturbing -to the popular mind to leave in existence the -present courts so long as the baron can dictate the -general policy of justice.</p> - -<p>Armed force will, of course, be employed to overawe -the discontented and to quiet unnecessary turbulence. -Unlike the armed forces of the old Feudalism, -the nominal control will be that of the State; the -soldiery will be regular, and not irregular. Not again -will the barons risk the general indignation arising -from the employment of Pinkertons and other private -armies. The worker has unmistakably shown his -preference, when he is to be subdued, for the militia -and the Federal army. It is not an unreasonable attitude, -and it is hardly to be doubted that it will be -respected. The militia of our Benevolent Feudalism<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_194" id="Page_194">[194]</a></span> -will be recruited, as now, mostly from the clerkly -class; and it will be officered largely by the sons and -nephews of the barons. But its actions will be tempered -by a saner policy. Governed by those who -have most to fear from popular exasperation, it will -show a finer restraint.</p> - - -<h3>V</h3> - -<p>Peace will be the main desideratum, and its cultivation -will be the most honored science of the age. -A happy blending of generosity and firmness will -characterize all dealings with open discontent; -but the prevention of discontent will be the prior -study, to which the intellect and the energies of -the nobles and their legates will be ever bent. To -that end the teachings of the schools and colleges, -the sermons, the editorials, the stump orations, -and even the plays at the theatres will be skilfully -moulded; and the questioning heart of the poor, -which perpetually seeks some answer to the painful -riddle of the earth, will meet with a multitude of -mollifying responses. These will be: from the -churches, that discontent is the fruit of atheism, and -that religion alone is a solace for earthly woe; from -the colleges, that discontent is ignorant and irrational, -since conditions have certainly bettered in -the last one hundred years; from the newspapers, -that discontent is anarchy; and from the stump -orators that it is unpatriotic, since this nation is the -greatest and most glorious that ever the sun shone -upon. As of old, these reasons will for the time<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_195" id="Page_195">[195]</a></span> -suffice; and against the possibility of recurrent -questionings new apologetics will be skilfully formulated, -to be put forth as occasion requires.</p> - -<p>Crises will come, as in the life of all nations and -societies; but these will be happily surmounted, and -the régime will continue, the stronger for its trial. -A crisis of some moment will follow upon the large -displacements of labor soon to result from the -shutting up of needless factories and the concentration -of production in the larger workshops. Discontent -will spread, and it will be fomented, to some -extent, by agitation. But the agitation will be -guarded in expression and action, and it will be -relatively barren of result. For most ills there is -somewhere a remedy, if only it can be discovered and -made known. The disease of sedition is one whose -every symptom and indication will be known by -rote to our social pathologists of to-morrow, and the -possible dangers of an epidemic will, in all cases, be -provided against. In such a crisis as that following -upon the displacement of labor a host of economists, -preachers, and editors will be ready to show indisputably -that the evolution taking place is for the -best interests of all; that it follows a “natural and -inevitable law”; that those who have been thrown -out of work have only their own incompetency to -blame; that all who really want work can get it, -and that any interference with the prevailing régime -will be sure to bring on a panic, which will only -make matters worse. Hearing this, the multitude -will hesitatingly acquiesce and thereupon subside; -and though occasionally a radical journal or a radical<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_196" id="Page_196">[196]</a></span> -agitator will counsel revolt, the mass will remain -quiescent. Gradually, too, by one method or another, -sometimes by the direct action of the nobility, the -greater part of the displaced workers will find some -means of getting bread, while those who cannot -will be eliminated from the struggle and cease to be -a potential factor for trouble. Crises of other kinds -and from other causes will arise, only to be checkmated -and overcome. What the barons will most -dread will be the collective assertion of the villeins -at the polls; but this, too, from experience, they will -know to be something which, while dangerous, may -yet be thwarted. By the putting forward of a hundred -irrelevant issues they can hopelessly divide the -voters at each election; or, that failing, there is -always to be trusted as a last resort the cry of impending -panic.</p> - - -<h3>VI</h3> - -<p>Gradually the various processes in the social life -merge, like the confluents of some mighty Amazon, -into a definite and confined stream of tendency. A -more perfect, a better coördinated unity develops -in the baronial class, and the measure of its control -is heightened and extended to a golden mean which -insures supremacy with peace. The under-classes -settle in their appointed grooves, and the professional -intermediaries definitely and openly assume their -dual function of advisers to the barons and of interpreters -to the people of the baronial will and ways. -Laws, customs, the arts,—all the institutions and -social forces,—change with the industrial transformation,<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_197" id="Page_197">[197]</a></span> -and attain a finer harmony with the actual -facts of life. All except literature, be it said, for -this has outdistanced its fellows in the great current -and already reflects the conditions, the moods, and -ideals of the society of to-morrow. Here, at least, -the force of nature can no farther go, and no change -is to be anticipated for the present. But the other -institutions and social forces are gradually transformed, -and when the full coalescence of all the -factors is attained, our Benevolent Feudalism, -without a shock, without so much variance as will -enable any man to say, “It is here,” passes to its -ascendency, and the millennium of peace and order -begins.</p> - -<p>Peace and stability it will maintain at all hazards; -and the mass, remembering the chaos, the turmoil, -the insecurity of the past, will bless its reign. Peace -and stability will be its arguments of defence against -all criticism, domestic or foreign. An observant -visitor from some foreign State may pick a defect -here and there; but the eloquent defender of the -régime will answer: Look upon the tranquillity that -everywhere prevails, and reflect upon the inquietude -and anarchy of the past. The disturbances of labor -have ceased, and sedition, though occasionally encountered, -is easily thwarted and put down. The -crudities and barbarities of other days have given -way to ordered regularities. Efficiency—the faculty -of getting things—is at last rewarded as it should -be, for the efficient have inherited the earth and its -fulness. The lowly, “whose happiness is greater -and whose welfare is more thoroughly conserved<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_198" id="Page_198">[198]</a></span> -when governed than when governing,” as a twentieth-century -philosopher said of them, are settled and -happy in the state which reason and experience teach -is their God-appointed lot. They are comfortable, -too; and if the patriarchal ideal of a vine and fig tree -for each is not yet attained, at least each has his -rented patch in the country or his rented cell in a -city building. Bread and the circus are freely given -to the deserving, and as for the undeserving, they -are merely reaping the rightful rewards of their contumacy -and pride. Order reigns, each has his justly -appointed share, and the State rests in security, “lapt -in universal law.”</p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"></div><!--Page break for ePub--> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_199" id="Page_199">[199]</a></span></p> - - - - -<h2>INDEX</h2> - - -<ul class="index"><li class="ifrst">A</li> - -<li class="indx">Abbott, Rev. Dr. Lyman, quoted, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Absolutism, of heads of combinations, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">“enlightened,” <a href="#Page_60">60</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Abstinence, seigniorial, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Accidents, to railroad workers, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100-101</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">to workmen generally, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">laws regarding, <a href="#Page_93">93-96</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Adams, Professor Henry C., <a href="#Page_49">49</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">quoted, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Addams, Jane, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Agriculture, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47-57</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Alger, George W., quoted, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Anacharsis the Scythian, quoted, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Anarchist-Communism, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">“Anticipations,” <a href="#Page_1">1</a>, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Arbitration, legislation in behalf of, <a href="#Page_97">97-98</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Aristotle, quoted, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Arnold, Matthew, quoted, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ashby-Macfadyen, Irene, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">quoted, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Automobiles, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">B</li> - -<li class="indx">Bacon, Francis, quoted, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Baer, George F., quoted, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_81">81</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Baldwin, Judge Simeon A., <a href="#Page_127">127</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">quoted, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Barons, <em>see</em> Magnates.</li> - -<li class="indx">Benefactions, of the magnates, <a href="#Page_9">9-10</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_45">45-46</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59-66</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Benevolence, of the magnates, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160-161</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Blacklisting, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185-186</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Blue, Leonard A., quoted, <a href="#Page_84">84-85</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Brewer, Justice David J., quoted, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131-132</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bryan, Hon. W. J., <a href="#Page_5">5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">“Business,” main cult of magnates, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">cultural effect of, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">honesty of, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">sacred privileges of, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">C</li> - -<li class="indx">Capital, independent, persistence of, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">transformation of, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Carnegie, Andrew, quoted, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Census, bulletin on industrial combinations, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on agriculture, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on wages, <a href="#Page_68">68-79</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">on printing and publishing, <a href="#Page_141">141-143</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Chapman, John Jay, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Child labor, <a href="#Page_76">76-82</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">abuses of, <a href="#Page_79">79-81</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Clark, Professor John B., <a href="#Page_3">3</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">quoted, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Coke, Sir Edward, quoted, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Colorado Fuel and Iron Co., <a href="#Page_60">60-61</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Combinations, industrial, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">recent growth of, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">commercial, mining, and transportation, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">unification of, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">absolutism of heads of, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Commissions, state, <a href="#Page_84">84-85</a>.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_200" id="Page_200">[200]</a></span></li> - -<li class="indx">Competition, decline of, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Conspicuous consumption, <a href="#Page_40">40-41</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Contract-labor law, violations of, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Court agents, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187-188</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Courts, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102-121</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">“Courts baron,” <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">D</li> - -<li class="indx">Davies, Professor Henry, quoted, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Democracy, persistence of, <a href="#Page_182">182-183</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Discontent, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125-129</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Disraeli, Benjamin, quoted, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Dodd, S. C. T., quoted, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Draper, William R., <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Drink consumption, <a href="#Page_170">170-171</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">E</li> - -<li class="indx">Edwards, Professor George Clinton, quoted, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Emery, Judge Lucilius A., quoted, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Employers’ duties (legal), <a href="#Page_90">90-91</a>, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Employers’ liability, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99-100</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103-112</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Endowments, <em>see</em> Benefactions.</li> - -<li class="indx">Engels, Friedrich, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Entrepreneurs, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">F</li> - -<li class="indx">Farmers, <em>see</em> Agriculture.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fellow-servants, <a href="#Page_108">108-109</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fessenden, Stephen D., quoted, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108-109</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Feudalism, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181-199</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fisher, Brooke, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Flint, Charles R., <a href="#Page_29">29</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">quoted, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fowler, Thomas P., <a href="#Page_31">31</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Frick, H. C., <a href="#Page_33">33</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">G</li> - -<li class="indx">Gambling, increase of, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171-172</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">George, Henry, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Godkin, E. L., quoted, <a href="#Page_126">126-127</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gould, George, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">H</li> - -<li class="indx">Hadley, Dr. Arthur Twining, quoted, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hall, Dr. Stanley, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hanna, Hon. Marcus A., <a href="#Page_29">29</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Harriman, E. H., quoted, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hewitt, Hon. Abram S., quoted, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hill, James J., <a href="#Page_28">28</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hillis, Rev. Dr. Newell Dwight, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Honesty, in “business,” <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Huntington, Rev. Dr. W. R., <a href="#Page_151">151</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">I</li> - -<li class="indx">Immigration, of farmers into Canada, <a href="#Page_49">49-50</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Income Tax, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Industrial Commission, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Industries, petty, numerical growth of, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">limitation of, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">subordination of, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Injunctions, against automobilists, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">against workmen, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118-121</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Interstate Commerce Commission, quoted, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ireland, Archbishop John, quoted, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">J</li> - -<li class="indx">Jackson, Judge John J., <a href="#Page_31">31</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">quoted, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Jones, Hon. Samuel M., <a href="#Page_164">164</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Judiciary, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102-121</a>.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_201" id="Page_201">[201]</a></span></li> - - -<li class="ifrst">K</li> - -<li class="indx">Keller, Judge B. F., quoted, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Kelly, Edmond, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Kershaw, John B. C., quoted, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Kidd, Benjamin, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Kropotkin, Peter, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">L</li> - -<li class="indx">Labor, seigniorial praise of, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">in factories, <a href="#Page_66">66-82</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">of children, <a href="#Page_76">76-82</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">attitude of lawmakers toward, <a href="#Page_85">85-89</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">attitude of judges toward, <a href="#Page_103">103</a> <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">et seq.</i>;</li> -<li class="isub1">under new feudalism, <a href="#Page_184">184-186</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191-192</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lacey, B. R., <a href="#Page_80">80</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lawmakers, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83-101</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Legislation, “labor” and social, <a href="#Page_85">85-89</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130-133</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Literature, present state of, <a href="#Page_175">175-179</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lloyd, Henry D., <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">quoted, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Low, Seth, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">quoted, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">M</li> - -<li class="indx">MacArthur, Rev. Dr. R. S., quoted, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">McLennan, Judge Peter B., <a href="#Page_105">105</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Magnates, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">self-consciousness of the, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">cult of “business” of the, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">invasion of literature by the, <a href="#Page_28">28-29</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">praise of labor by the, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">attitude toward trade-unions of, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">attitude toward government of the, <a href="#Page_32">32-39</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">benefactions of the, <a href="#Page_9">9-10</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_45">45-46</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59-66</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">ostentation of the, <a href="#Page_39">39-44</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">“liberality” to employees of the, <a href="#Page_59">59-66</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">control of legislation by the, <a href="#Page_83">83-89</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99-101</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">influence upon judiciary of the, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">praise of the, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">influence upon the press of the, <a href="#Page_143">143-148</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">influence upon the pulpit of the, <a href="#Page_148">148-153</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">general influence upon society of the, <a href="#Page_154">154-170</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">influence upon literature of the, <a href="#Page_175">175-179</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">class consciousness of the, <a href="#Page_180">180-181</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">increased power of the, <a href="#Page_182">182-183</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192-193</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196-198</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Magruder, Justice B. D., quoted, <a href="#Page_114">114-115</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Mallock, W. H., quoted, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Manufactures, census of, <a href="#Page_68">68-79</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Marx, Karl, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">quoted, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Matson, Clarence H., <a href="#Page_49">49</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Militia, under new feudalism, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Mitchell, John, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Model workshops and villages, <a href="#Page_60">60-61</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Morganization of industry, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Mosso, Professor Angelo, quoted, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Munseyization of literature, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">N</li> - -<li class="indx">Neo-Jeffersonians, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Newspapers, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139-148</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">O</li> - -<li class="indx">O’Brien, Judge Denis, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Old-age pensions, <a href="#Page_61">61-66</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ostentation, of the magnates, <a href="#Page_39">39-44</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">P</li> - -<li class="indx">Pastors, of churches, <a href="#Page_148">148-153</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Patton, Professor Francis L., quoted, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Peck, Professor Harry Thurston, quoted, <a href="#Page_128">128-129</a>, <a href="#Page_134">134-135</a>, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pensions, old-age, <a href="#Page_61">61-66</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Potter, Bishop Henry C., quoted, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Production, small-shop, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>.<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_202" id="Page_202">[202]</a></span></li> - - -<li class="ifrst">R</li> - -<li class="indx">Railroads, combinations of, <a href="#Page_14">14</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">resistance to law and justice by, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111-112</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">commissions for control of, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">accidents upon, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100-101</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Relief organizations, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Retailers, small, decline of, <a href="#Page_22">22-23</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Richmond, Benjamin A., “The New Feudalism,” <a href="#Page_58">58</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rockefeller, John D., Jr., quoted, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Roosevelt, Theodore, quoted, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ross, Edward A., <a href="#Page_154">154</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">quoted, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Russell, George W. E., quoted, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Russell, Hon. W. E., quoted, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">S</li> - -<li class="indx">Sage, Russell, quoted, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sanborn, Judge Walter H., <a href="#Page_104">104</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Savage, Rev. Dr. Minot J., <a href="#Page_151">151</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Schooling, J. Holt, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Seigniorial mind, renascence of, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">instances of, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_180">180-181</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Shareholders, increase of, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160-163</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">subordination of, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Shearman (Thomas G.) and Redfield (Amasa A.), quoted, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Single-Taxers, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Socialism, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Socialists, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Social Reform Club, pamphlet of, quoted, <a href="#Page_118">118-120</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Spencer, Herbert, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Steel combination, magnitude of, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Stimson, F. J., <a href="#Page_86">86</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">quoted, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">“Success,” <a href="#Page_156">156-160</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Suicide, increase of, <a href="#Page_173">173-174</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sullivan, J. W., <a href="#Page_79">79</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sumner, Professor William G., quoted, <a href="#Page_122">122-123</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>, <a href="#Page_135">135-136</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Swayne, Judge Charles, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">T</li> - -<li class="indx">Talbot, Bishop Ethelbert, quoted, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tenantry, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">increase of, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50-55</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Thayer, Judge Amos M., <a href="#Page_104">104</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tolstoi, Lyof N., <a href="#Page_2">2</a>, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Trusts, <em>see</em> Combinations.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">V</li> - -<li class="indx">Value of dollar, comparative, <a href="#Page_73">73-74</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Vandervelde, Emile, quoted, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Veblen, Thorstein, quoted, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Villeinage, the new, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184-185</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">W</li> - -<li class="indx">Wadlin, Horace G., quoted, <a href="#Page_87">87-88</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Wage-earners, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66-82</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">number in manufactures, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">child, <a href="#Page_76">76-82</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">women, <a href="#Page_74">74-76</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Wage-scale, adjustment of, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">comparisons of, <a href="#Page_66">66-79</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Wage-system, continuance of, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Wallace, Judge William J., quoted, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Warman, Cy, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Webb, Sidney, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Wells, H. G., <a href="#Page_1">1</a>, <a href="#Page_3">3</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Whittelsey, Dr. Sarah S., <a href="#Page_95">95</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Willoughby, William F., <a href="#Page_94">94</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Wright, Colonel Carroll D., <a href="#Page_66">66-67</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Wyckoff, Professor Walter A., <a href="#Page_133">133</a>;</li> -<li class="isub1">quoted, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>.</li> -</ul> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<div class="chapter"></div><!--Page break for ePub--> - -<div class="transnote"> -<h2 style="margin-top: 0em">Transcriber’s Note:</h2> - -<p>Footnotes have been relabeled consecutively through the document, -and the one footnote not associated with a table has been moved to the -end of its chapter.</p> - -<p>Punctuation has been made consistent.</p> - -<p>Variations in spelling and hyphenation were retained as they appear in -the original publication, except that obvious typographical were -corrected.</p> -</div> - -<p> </p> -<p> </p> -<hr class="full" /> -<p>***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK OUR BENEVOLENT FEUDALISM***</p> -<p>******* This file should be named 53052-h.htm or 53052-h.zip *******</p> -<p>This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:<br /> -<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/5/3/0/5/53052">http://www.gutenberg.org/5/3/0/5/53052</a></p> -<p> -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed.</p> - -<p>Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. -</p> - -<h2>START: FULL LICENSE<br /> -<br /> -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE<br /> -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK</h2> - -<p>To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license.</p> - -<h3>Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works</h3> - -<p>1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8.</p> - -<p>1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.</p> - -<p>1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others.</p> - -<p>1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States.</p> - -<p>1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:</p> - -<p>1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed:</p> - -<blockquote><p>This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United - States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost - no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use - it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with - this eBook or online - at <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you - are not located in the United States, you'll have to check the laws - of the country where you are located before using this - ebook.</p></blockquote> - -<p>1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.</p> - -<p>1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work.</p> - -<p>1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.</p> - -<p>1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License.</p> - -<p>1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.</p> - -<p>1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.</p> - -<p>1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that</p> - -<ul> -<li>You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation."</li> - -<li>You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works.</li> - -<li>You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work.</li> - -<li>You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.</li> -</ul> - -<p>1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.</p> - -<p>1.F.</p> - -<p>1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment.</p> - -<p>1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE.</p> - -<p>1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem.</p> - -<p>1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.</p> - -<p>1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions.</p> - -<p>1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. </p> - -<h3>Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm</h3> - -<p>Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life.</p> - -<p>Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org.</p> - -<h3>Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation</h3> - -<p>The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.</p> - -<p>The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact</p> - -<p>For additional contact information:</p> - -<p> Dr. Gregory B. Newby<br /> - Chief Executive and Director<br /> - gbnewby@pglaf.org</p> - -<h3>Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation</h3> - -<p>Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS.</p> - -<p>The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/donate">www.gutenberg.org/donate</a>.</p> - -<p>While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate.</p> - -<p>International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.</p> - -<p>Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate</p> - -<h3>Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works.</h3> - -<p>Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support.</p> - -<p>Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition.</p> - -<p>Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org</p> - -<p>This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.</p> - -</body> -</html> - diff --git a/old/53052-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/53052-h/images/cover.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 630583e..0000000 --- a/old/53052-h/images/cover.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/53052-h/images/logo.jpg b/old/53052-h/images/logo.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 97e585a..0000000 --- a/old/53052-h/images/logo.jpg +++ /dev/null |
