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 /old/53052-0.txt | |
| parent | a917c956006240e22f455d20a03c0b3334ddf0f5 (diff) | |
Diffstat (limited to 'old/53052-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/53052-0.txt | 6021 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 6021 deletions
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. - |