The Standard

Volume 1 April 23, 1887

Page 1


Gagging The Press

Archbishop Corrigan Sends a Threatening Letter to the Catholic “Herald.”

The following interesting and characteristic document by a strange series of accidents, unnecessary to describe, came into our hands. Its publication will surprise no one more than Hie gentlemen to whom it is addressed. We do not feel bound by the obligation of secrecy which the writer seeks to impose on those gentlemen. We sincerely hope that he will not excommunicate the editor and the proprietor of the Catholic Herald for our publication of the letter, and we hardly think he will deem it worth his white to excommunicate us:

452 Madison Avenue,

New York, April 13,1887.

To the Editor and Proprietor of the Catholic


Gentlemen—By this note, which is entirely private and not to be published, I wish to call your attention to the fact that the third plenary council of Baltimore, following the leadership of Pope Leo XIII, has pointed out the duties of the Catholic press, and denounced the abuses of which. Journals styling themselves Catholic are sometimes guilty. “That paper alone,” says the council (decree No. 238), is to be regarded as Catholic that is prepared to submit in all things to ecclesiastical authority.” Later on it warns all Catholic writers against presuming to attack publicly the manner in which a bishop rules his diocese, affirming that those who so presume, as well as their approvers and abettors, are not only guilty of very grievous scandals, but deserve, moreover, to be dealt with by canonical censures.

For some time past the utterances of the Catholic Herald have been shockingly scandalous. As this newspaper is published in this diocese, I hereby warn you that if you continue in this course of conduct it will be at your peril. I am, gentlemen,

Yours truly,

M. A. Corrigan,

Archbishop of New York.


The Shoemaker's Field.

In the days when New York was regarded as a walled city and its whole population was crowded on the southern point of Manhattan island, certain sanitary reformers objected to the continuance within the city limits of the tan pits maintained by a number of shoemakers in the old swamp, which then lay on both sides of what is now Broad street. The result was that the shoemakers were driven to seek a new location beyond the city walls, and in a marshy valley along Maiden's path, now known as Maiden lane, they obtained some sixteen acres of land, on which they established tan pits, it being the custom at that time for cordwainers or shoemakers to tan their own leather. It appears that the original owners of the land were Conrad Ten Eyck. Jacob Abrahams, John Harpending (or Harberdinck) and Carsten Luersen. There is some confusion as to these Barnes in the early annals, for at the time of the division of the property in 1696 it appears that the owners were John Harberdinck, Heiltje Clopper (described as the widow of one of 1he original grantees), Charles Lodwick (described as a merchant who had in the year 1694 bought the interest of Hendrick Ten Eyck), Abraham Santvoort (apparently the same man called Jacob Abrahams in the earlier account) and Carsten Luersen.

In 1696 a deed of partition, accompanied by a map, was made and filed, by which it appeared that John Harberdinck (so he signed his name to his will), became the owner of certain lots indicated by shading on the accompanying reproduction of the old map, and also of all the lots on Broadway not included in the shading, now the property of various individuals. This John Harberdinck, or Harpendinck, who was also called John Harpending, speaks of himself in his will as a cordwainer and also as a merchant. He is described as “an aged, excellent and influential member of the church, who frequently officiated as elder and deacon.” He was married in this city in 1667, shortly after the transfer of the colony from the Dutch to the English, and he died in 1722 a t an advanced age, leaving no children. By a will dated April 22, 1722, John Harberdinck, after giving a number of specific legacies to certain relatives of his own in Holland and also to certain relatives and connections in this country, made the following bequest:

“I, the said John Harberdinck, do hereby give, devise and bequeath unto the said minister, elders and deacons of the Reformed Protestant Dutch church of the city of New York, and their successors forever all that my testators right, fifth interest and property to an equal fifth part, share and proportion of all that tract or parcel of land situate, lying and being upon Manhattan island, within the city of New York, called or known by the the name of Shoemakers held, or lane, on the northeast side of Maiden lane or path which leads into a certain street called Queen's street; the which said tract or parcel of land contains. by estimation, about sixteen acres, and by mutual consent, agreement and approbation of all the proprietors or part owners therein concerned some years past was surveyed and laid out into one hundred and sixty-four lots, with convenient streets and lanes to accommodate the same, as may fully and amply appear by a certain instrument of indenture . . . by which . . . it is declared that John Harberdinck's property share in the said one hundred and sixty-four lots shall be and consist in five and thirty lots, . . . together with four other lots or pieces of ground more out of the five lots mentioned, lying on Broadway.

All of this property, owned by him a that time, indicated on the accompanying map by shaded hues, he devised to the ministers, elders and deacons of the church, and to their successors forever, “immediately after the death and decease of my wife, Mayken Harberdinck, and only to the proper use, benefit and behoof, and for the payment and satisfying of the yearly stipend, salary and maintenance of the respective minister or ministers which from time to time and at all times hereafter shall be duly and legally called to the ministry of said church, and to no other use whatsoever. . . . Provided always that it shall not be within the power of the said lawful minister elders and deacons,. . . . nor in the power of any other person or persons whatsoever hereafter, to make sale, dispose or alienate any part of the said lands and premises, nor any of the profits, benefits, revenues or advantages arising out of the same to any other use or uses whatsoever, but that the same shall be forever and remain to the only proper use, benefit and behoof as above is recited, declared and expressed.” The property thus bequeathed is, as a glance at the map will show, in the very heart of the business portion of lower New York, and it has been the source of the magnificent revenue of the Collegiate Dutch church, the history of which was given in last week's STANDARD. A liberal construction of the terms of the will would appear to forbid any application of the funds derived from the estate to any other purpose than the payment of ministers' salaries, and were the fund thus applied the revenue now probably would be sufficient to provide for the support of a hundred Christian ministers in as many parts of the city.

The Reformed Protestant Dutch church of the city of New York was incorporated by letters patent under the great seal of the colony of New York, May 11, 1696, by which the church was then erected and certain lands were granted and confirmed to the corporation, and it was authorized to purchase and hold other lands not exceeding a yearly value of £200. More than half a century ago it became evident to the casual observer that the church was deriving a revenue vastly beyond £200 a year from its property on the old shoemakers field, and one Van Kleeck. a descendant of one of the residuary legatees under John Harberdinck's will, came forward to question the right of the church to its rich heritage. He demanded that it should be compelled to declare the title by which it claimed to hold these lands, and that it should make an exhibit of its accounts so as to show the sources and extent of its income. The applicant showed that after his bequest to the church John Harberdinck gave the remainder of his estate to his wife, Mayken Harberdinck, for her life, and, after her, to various parties, one fourth of it going to the children of Baltus Van Kleeck, through whom the plaintiff claimed. He further claimed that even if the land described in the deed of partition was legally the property of the church that a certain undivided piece of land between Fulton and John, Nassau and William streets, marked in the map as a vacant lot and declared in the said deed to be still held by the original owners in common, was not included in the bequest to the church.

The case was vigorously contested by able lawyers on both sides, and it reached the court of appeals in 1838. Van Kleeck declared his belief that the lands held by the church at the filing of his affidavit yielded a yearly income of $30,000, and he complained that the officers of the corporation, had refused to be sworn. The church apparently made no attempt to defend its legal title to the land in question on any other ground than that of possession. It simply denied that Van Kleeck had any claim to it under the will, and insisted that he could not compel the church corporation to make any disclosure of its title or render any statement of its affairs. The question practically narrowed itself down to this: Admitting that the church has no legal right to these lands, to whom do the fall, the residuary legatee or the heir at law? This was the question argued before the court of appeals, and the final decision of the majority was that the residuary legatee had no claim whatever to the property under the will, and that, therefore, Van Kleeck had no standing in court and was not entitled to compel any disclosure on the part of the trustees.

Chief Justice Nelson read the opinion, and he said: “It is admitted, for the purpose of this decision, that the devise to the church is void, that body being incapable, as the law stood at the time, of taking or holding real property by devise. The question is, 'Does the property go to the residuary devisees?” The decision of the court was that, on the contrary, the testator especially excluded them from the property devised, and that the only claimant entitled to dispute the title of the church is the heir at law. Justice Cowan, in a dissenting opinion, said: “Were it necessary to consider the question in respect to the exception of bodies corporate in the statute of devises of Henry VIII the point would not be so clear. This country was, except in the greater amount of unseated land, as much open to the evil of corporate perpetuities, especially those of ecclesiastical concoction, as the country from which we immediately derive our blood, our habits, our laws and our religion. The church has in all ages had agents whose mistaken zeal was ready to turn the dying f ears of testators to the purposes of pious testamentary donations. The question, therefore, lay between depriving it of corporate powers altogether or restricting its power of taking by devise, and the latter was adopted. It is a policy, in fact, to this day common both to the English statutes and to our own.”

The statute of devises of Henry VIII alluded to by Justice Cowan is claimed by some to be a part of the law of the land in this country, because it was in force at the time of our separation from England and has never been specifically repealed. It was only one of many statutes enacted from time to time in England to guard against the very abuse referred to by Justice Cowan. Such a devise of land to any body politic, ecclesiastical or lay, was forbidden by statute of Edward I, and the lord of the fee was authorized to take possession of such lands, and in his default it was enacted that such lands should go to the king. In the course of time this provision was extended to all lands purchased for the use of guilds, fraternities and so on. When testamentary power over freehold lands was granted during the reign of Henry VIII, bodies politic and corporate were especially excluded from the benefit of the statute. It is greatly to be regretted that a similar jealousy against surrendering the control of land to an undying corporation in perpetuity has not characterized legislation and legal ridings in the United States. It may, however, turn out in the end that such abuses as have grown up, particularly in this city, will serve a useful purpose of recalling to men's minds the ancient doctrine and usage which makes the sovereign—that is, in this country, the people—sole owner of the soil. When such a principle conies to be recognized we shall have an end of the doctrine of adverse possession by which the Dutch Reformed and Trinity churches claim and exercise the power to levy enormous taxes for corporate benefit on the land of this island. Then, in the case of a void bequest, like that of John Harberdinck, to a corporation forbidden by law to receive such a bequest, where no man having any legal right as a tenant appears, the paramount lords of the soil, the people, will be awarded the land, the right to possess which is in dispute.

The Reformed Protestant Dutch church of New York possesses a fifth of the old shoemakers Held by a title that cannot be defended on moral grounds. It puts the revenue from that property, as has been shown in a previous paper, to no public use. It uses its funds to pay aristocratic preachers for ministering in costly churches, built from the revenue of the estate, to rich and fashionable congregations abundantly [text missing] build churches for themselves and to pay for such preaching as suits them. The exact income thus derived and spent it is not possible to state. That it is very great is however beyond dispute. Estimates as to the income derived by the church from the shoemaker's field property vary from $125,000 to $150,000 a year. In a few instances we have definite facts. The lot having a twenty foot front on Broadway and running one hundred and sixty-two feet ten inches along John street, and indicated on the map, is in some respects undesirable, because the straightening of John street since the original plot was made has greatly narrowed its Broadway front. On May 1, 1880, this lot was leased to Austin Corbin for twenty-one years at $18,000, it being a part of the bargain that Mr. Corbin should within three years erect thereon a brick and stone building to cost at least .$200,000. At the end of the twenty-one years, according to the lease, the animal rental value of the ground and the value of the building are to be fixed by arbitrators, and the church may choose whether it will buy the building at the appraised value or renew the lease at the rent thus fixed.

Another lot at Broadway and Fulton street, now occupied by the Evening Post building, was leased to William E. Fleming. George Roll, John Belger and Charles L. Fleming in May, 1865, for twenty-one years at $19,000 a year on condition that the tenants should erect a building thereon, worth at least $50,000. Between the lot thus leased and Fulton street there was a strip four feet eleven inches in width, running the whole length of the lot. Fleming and others transferred their lease to William Cullen Bryant and Isaac Henderson on Feb. 27, 1873, and Mr. Bryant transferred his interest to Mr. Henderson on the first of May following. Henderson had, in some way, acquired possession of the narrow strip on Fulton street, and he sold it to the church for $120,000, and the church thereupon leased the whole lot thus enlarged to Henderson for sixty-three years from May 1, 1874, at $31,000 a year for the first twenty-one years, $35,000 a year for the second twenty-one years, and at not less than $35,000 a year for the third twenty-one years. Mr. Henderson thereupon built the present Evening Post building on the lot. Adding to this $31,000 the $18,000 paid by Austin Corbin, it appears that the church receives $49,000 a year in ground rent from its two Broadway lots. It is difficult to estimate its exact receipts from the remaining lots. Four and a half lots appearing on the original plan have since been subdivided into ten lots, yielding the estate $14,000 a year, which would be at the rate of $3,111 for each of the original lots. A lot on William street having a front of 40 feet and a depth of 90 feet, which rented in 1845 for $1,080, was leased again last May for $1,900. A lot fronting on John street 25 feet, leased in 1865 for $700, was again leased last year at $1.100 a year. This is one of the smallest lots on. the tract, and doubtless represents the minimum rent. It would be a moderate estimate to put the average rent of each .lot at $9,000 a year, or $70,000 for the whole 35. Adding to this the $19,000 received for the two Broadway lots, we have a total income for the church of $119,000 a year from the fifth part of the old swamp granted to the five shoemakers for their tan vats. This calculation leaves out the interest of the church in what was formerly the undivided vacant lot shown on the map, which is now thickly built up. Allowing but $3,000 for this, the annual income is brought up to $122,000 a year.

This, however, is not the whole revenue of the corporation. The lot on which the old post office stood was not a part of the Harberdinck bequest and it was alienable. The church sold it to the federal government for $200,000. It probably st/kl the site of the old Garden street church and invested the money. The consistory purchased the site of the Lafayette street church when land was cheap in that neighborhood, and now that building has been torn down to make way for a large building for manufacturing purposes on its site which has already been rented in advance of its erection at $12,500 a year. This shows that the income of the estate is growing more rapidly than the consistory can spend it, so that, if no change be made, it will fifty years hence be another one of the rich corporations authorized by absurd laws to levy an enormous land tax on the business people of New York to raise funds for no useful purpose whatever.

But old John Harberdinck only bequeathed a fifth part of the shoemakers field to the Dutch church. The other four-fifths of the property passed to private persons, whose heirs or assigns have from that time to the present derived proportionately as great an income from the estate as has the Dutch church. Leaving the Broadway property out of the calculation we find that the church is drawing at least $73,000 a year in ground rent from its other lots. The total rent then obtained by all the owners from that portion of the old field is $305,000 a year. That is to say, a number of land owners are permitted by law to levy a tax of $1,000 a day on the limited number of people doing business on that small spot.

But though recent maps leave out the Broadway lots in indicating the Shoemaker's field, there appears to be no reason for doing so. Broadway is given in the old maps as the western boundary of the tract. The original deed of partition, as recorded in the register's office, distinctly mentions all of the Broadway lots as included in the sixteen acres and assigns them to John Harberdinck. They extended along Broadway from Maiden lane a sufficient distance beyond Fulton street to include the Knox building. The two lots bequeathed to the church do not include a tenth part of the Broadway front. The remainder of it, though now owned by various individuals, I must be taken into account in making any estimate of the appreciation of this property in value. The tenth part owned by the church we have found is rented for $49,000 a year. It is a moderate estimate to put down all of these lots as yielding a ground rent of ten times that, or $490,000. Add to this the $305,000 annual rent for property off of Broadway, and we have a total rental of $855,000 a year derived from this old field. To this must be added the taxes paid by tenants, which, as the buildings are included in the valuation. Must yield nearly half as much more. It thus appears that private 'parties and the city together can obtain over a million dollars a year for permitting a comparatively small number of people to use for business purposes sixteen acres of this island between Ann street and Maiden lane.

The fact that the buildings are included in the present assessment does not- militate against this statement, for recent sales have shown that the assessment does not cover more than half of the value of both building and land at auction sale, and the land is almost invariably worth more than the building. Mr. Corbin agrees, for instance, to put up a building to cost $200,000 on the lot at Broadway and John street. The interest on this at six per cent is $12,000, white has contracts to pay $18,000 a year rent, supposably five per cent on. the value of the land. It is entirely safe, then, to assume that t h e present assessment on houses and lots does not reach an amount equal to the selling value of the land alone.

Taking the revenues of the Randall farm as a basis for calculation, it was recently shown that by a tax levied exclusively on land values the municipality of New York could easily raise a revenue of $100,000,000 a year without increasing the burden now laid upon the people by rents paid to private owners and taxes directly or indirectly paid to the city. Randall's farm embraced twenty-one acres, thus covering the one hundred and eighty-sixth part of this island below Forty-second street, a portion of the city which at the time of the last census still held two-thirds of our whole population. The shoemaker's field, which is easily capable of bearing a tax of $1,000,000 a year on land values, contains but sixteen acres, or the two hundred and  fortieth part of the territory below Forty-second street. Taking it as a basis it would appear that a revenue of $240,000.000 annually could be obtained. Such a calculation would, however, be misleading, for unquestionably the rental value of this land. is above the average for the territory named. These figures, nevertheless, go to show the moderation of the calculation based on actual results in a portion of the city occupied for both business and residential purposes, and where neither stores nor residences yield rents so high as are paid in other parts of the city.

Neither of the estates described in these articles was selected on account of any special knowledge of its revenues. It is unquestionably the design of all those who control such pieces of property to conceal the facts concerning them. The Sailors' Snug Harbor is compelled by l aw to make some kind of a report to the city. The one it makes is blind and confusing enough, but it suffices to give at least a basis for calculating annual rents and for making a safe estimate of the steady and enormous increase in land values. In the case of the shoemaker's field the results are even more startling. Less than two centuries ago this property was a vacant swamp outside the city limits, to be had almost for the asking; fifty years ago it was a prize well worth struggling for in the courts; to-day it is yielding in ground rent and taxes a sum amounting to a million dollars a year. Let us suppose for a moment that the city had retained in its possession this and the adjacent property. Such a course would not have prevented its improvement. That fifth part of the property conveyed to the Collegiate church by John Harberdinck,a invalid will is as thoroughly improved as the portion divided up among individuals. At least one contract to erect a building costing $200,000 on one of these lots has been made by a shrewd business man within a few years. The conditions arising from practical public ownership would have given a more secure tenure than the twenty-one years' lease taken by Austin Corbin for the lot at the corner of Broadway and John street. In the other case the builder would have had a guarantee of perpetual possession, provided he continued to pay a tax no greater than that he will pay to the Collegiate church and the city combined. The municipality would have had, however, the benefit of the vast sums now paid to private individuals for the privilege of occupying this ground. It could, without encountering any enormous expense, have widened John, Fulton, Nassau, Ann and other streets. It could have covered these and all other streets with perfect pavements, erected public buildings wherever they were needed, instead of paying heavy rents to individuals as it now does, and such a great public improvement as the Brooklyn bridge could have been readily built out of the annual surplus without placing a mortgage on the industry and enterprise of the future in the shape of a public debt.

It must be plain to the dullest comprehension that all of this would have been easily possible had the Citizens asserted the doctrine of the land for the people while the municipality was still possessed of vast tracts of common land on this island. The past is irrecoverable, but the future is in our own hands. The increase in land values continues at an accelerated pace, and it will be vastly greater during the coming century than it has been during the past. two hundred years. The question is, shall this generation go on repeating the blunder of the past, or will it, even at this late day, secure to the people the values that their mere presence on this island creates. This is the issue of present politics that dwarfs all others into insignificance, and no one who comprehends all that such a change assures can have any hesitation in giving his best energies to assist in bringing it about. Happily the workingmen, whose wits have never been befogged by a false system of political economy, who have personally experienced the abomination of overcrowding, while they see thousands of acres lying unused and vacant within the city limits, have found and declared the truth; but the reform that they purpose will not benefit only those technically called workingmen. Every renter in this city has an equal interest in bringing about a change that will multiply homes, cheapen the rent of dwellings, promote building and other industries, and which, though it may not lower the ground rents of business places, will divert those rents from private pockets to the municipal treasury to be used in works of public utility for the common benefit. Let the retail storekeepers, especially, think what it would mean to them to have established a system that would set an army of men to work in building up the waste places of New York, and thus give an impulse to every trade in the city.


Page 2


Going Into Business

How The Apothecaries of New York Are Situated

Some Interesting Facts From a Veteran Observer in the Business—What Retailers Say—What Can be Hoped For by the Average Druggist's Clerk

A member of the Standard's staff lately obtained the following interview with a gentleman whose relations with the drug trade of New York enable him to speak as an authority:

Reporter—Would you please give me a general description of the druggists' business in this city today as compared with what it was, say, half a century ago, or before the changes took place in the trade and business of the country, which have marked the last twenty-five years especially?

Druggist—I have known the city but thirty-eight years, and can state my experience for shat time only.

R.—How many retail drug stores are there in the city?

D.—I should say between 700 and 800. Let us see; here is the business directory—120 names to a pace—five pages and a half of druggists names—five in the directory. Thirty years ago there were about 400. The increase has been about the same as the increase in population; a little larger, I should say.

R.—Has competition remained about the dame!

D.—Competition is felt much worse, especially in the hist tea years. A great deal of it is caused by the large general stores opening fancy goods counters and taking the sales from druggists. As a matter of fact that feature dates from the day when Macy & Co. put Cashmere bouquet soap on sale at a cut-rate price.

R.—Are sales also affected by the druggists who advertise low rates?

D.—There are in the trade what we call “cutters.” The majority of such dealers are, in my opinion, not equal in character as business men to the others. They are, of course, financially a detriment to the rest.

R.—As to rents?

D.—Rents increase more rapidly than business. Leases are short—from one to five years, the latter term being the exception.

R.—Are there openings offering for young clerks to begin business for themselves?

D.—Business openings for men having the capital and competent to manage places for themselves are very few.

R.—What is the range of salaries?

D.—They rarely, very rarely, exceed $1,200 a year. They may average $800—that is, for graduates of a college of pharmacy. According to law, a prescription clerk must have four years' experience, and of course must be a man of some education.

R.—Do manufacturers and wholesale dealers own retail stores?

D.—They do not, as a rule, start them as an enterprise. Retailers occasionally fall so deeply into debt to those supplying them with goods that a mortgage is taken on the store. When this occurs it is usually in the case of a beginner whose sales have not been profitable enough to enable him to meet his notes. The wholesale men then secure themselves by obtain a first lien on the goods.

R.—What capital is required. to set up a drug business?

D.—To stock a store, pay for the fixtures and wait a reasonable time for business to come to a new stand a druggist must command from $5,000 to $8,000. Thirty years ago one-half was sufficient. The opening for druggists is generally in a newly built locality.

R.—How many profits does a consumer pay?

D.—Three. The manufacturer's, the wholesale dealer's and the retailer's.

R.—Do the wholesale houses increase in number?

D.—No .

R.—What proportion of retail druggists own the buildings in which they have their stores?

D.—Very few, I should say. But that is partly owing to the fact that the capital can be better utilized in business than in real estate.

This ended the interview. Several retail druggists substantiated most of the statements and opinions of the gentleman as given above, dwelling especially upon the facts relating to compelling and rent. One of them took up the question of a druggist placing his capital in a drug store rather than in real estate. That. he said, could be readily explained. As a matter of fact, but few retail druggists had capital sufficient to become investors in real estate. The capital going into a store was in general partly a man's own, partly borrowed money, and partly goods held on commission or on credit from wholesale houses. Besides, in investing in a retail store, a working druggist employed himself as well as the capital he handled. There was bitter complaint, he knew, among many retail druggists at the increase of rent made by their landlords in proportion to their ability to pay it. The druggist took the risks, did the work, exercised his ingenuity in drumming up a custom, and then delivered over to his landlord a large percentage of the profits of it all. There was a popular notion that the profits in the apothecary's trade were enormous. He heard it said lately that they were five hundred per cent—a cent's worth of salt or flour selling at five cents. How much was there, he would ask, in fancy goods and soaps, since such articles were sold at a shade above wholesale prices at the great stores? How much on postage stamps and many of the trifles that women buy? As to prescription sales, should not a man who has spent years in obtaining the knowledge of preparing prescriptions, and paid for his tuition, receive compensation for this time and money? He put up a prescription and charged, say, fifty cents for it. The materials cost, say, twelve cents. And the wise observer standing on the wayside would say he had made several hundred per cent. On the corner across the street was a man behind a bar selling whiskey. What cost at wholesale ten cents than man sold for fifty, and the time and money he put into his education were very little indeed. The druggist's five hundred per cent came seldom; the liquor dealer:s was with nearly every sale. But the liquor dealer's landlord found a way to reduce his income, and other nearby liquor dealers reduced the number of his sales. The same circumstances, he observed, affected the occupation of selling in whatever fine it might be. New dealers push in and cut business to pieces, and landlords increase the rents.

And so, reader, we have obtained some knowledge of the conditions that environ the drug business. We have seen that the retailer is commonly hampered by excessive competition, exorbitant rent and adventurous “cutters.” His clerks are bound to keep up the appearances that manifest themselves in “respectable” clothes and clean boarding houses on incomes only a trifle above that of the driver of a street car. The best of clerks, with a little capital, hesitates before going into business for himself. Neither dealer nor clerk can see a much improved condition ahead of him us a reward for long hours, obliging numbers to customers, a college educator, and constant study of public wants.

Well, what is the point to he made? Where shall we stop in our inferences? Shall we end with saying, “The drug business is a poor one for a clerk and not a very good one for an ambitious man with some capital,” and resolve to stow away in our minds this result of our examination, so that we may advise people to try rather some other occupation. And shall we also hug once more the precious old platitudes which tell us that every imaginable business has its seamy side, and that all conditions in life have their tribulations? Or shall we go on and accept tile profoundly scientific facts that out of every one hundred business men ninety-six are sure in fail some time, that the returns to capital and labor must on the average be about the same among surveyors of drugs as in other professions, or men would not become druggists, and that nowhere in the world are people better off than in America?

It might be comically illogical to suggest that the labor question had any connection with the profession of the pharmacist. It might be ludicrous to attempt to prove that land monopoly and the small incomes of the proprietors of drug stores had any relation. We must be careful lest our conclusions are carried too far.


The Views Of A Man Of Wealth.

He Speaks of the Dark Prospects for Poor Young Men.

A gentleman who stands at the head of a large manufacturing business spent an hour the other day in giving his views on the social question to a Standard writer. He said, by way of introduction, that he began life poor, had worked hard and had accumulated wealth. When he started in business the old methods prevailed. The railroad system of the country was far from complete, and the manufacturers sold their goods in smaller areas than they do now. Combinations of manufacturers were unknown. There was competition, but it was not felt with a tenth part of the force that it is now The country was being developed rapidly, business was taking on new forms, and to demand for capital and enterprise was felt in nearly every community. He himself had come to Now York at an opportune time, he had I found an opening in business, and later, believing that he saw necessity for a change in the methods of carrying on the line of manufacturing and selling in which he was engaged, he made a venture and reaped great success. While he could safely claim some of the qualities necessary to a business man—such as close attention to his affairs, moderation in living expenses and the like—he would not assume that he had powers not possessed by many young men in business today. Nor would he presume upon his own success to lecture the youth of this generation as to what course they should follow in order to imitate his success. He knew well enough that conditions had changed. Today no man could set up in the business in which he, the speaker, was engaged without investing a fortune in it and being prepared to encounter a systematic opposition by those already in it. The mechanic working at it in the shops must remain there. the rare accidents of fortune excepted. The clerk must expect to be a clerk, only a few gradations of promotion being open to him. Employees of any class were paid wages or salaries adjusted by the competition of the wage market. This was not enough; it was not what the world could yield in the way of a living, and it would not satisfy men as citizens of a republic and as intelligent men living in an age like the present. There would be demands soon made by the employed classes that would startle these who were trying to make it seem that conditions as they are are right and just and changeless. The labor unions and the new political party were feeling their way to new arid Letter conditions, and they were right in doing so. He knew men in the circle of his acquaintance who felt as he did. He saw many bright young men about him, and he often wondered what was to become of them. He could not see anything in the future for them further than positions under large firms or corporations, and such positions merely afforded a lite of toil without, generally, the hope of a competence. A return to the day little stores and factories was as impossible as a return to the time when there were no pools of manufacturers. The age of monopoly in many forms is here and the question i6 who shall be the monopolists, a few capitalists or all the people together. The great concerns like the Standard oil company could sell their products at lower prices than the markets had ever before quoted, but low prices were not the only point in which the public was interested. Doubtless, as consumers of manufactured goods, people are now better off than they were a generation ago, but opportunities for work are far less and prospects for a successful career in business are worse. The speaker said that he had viewed co-operation as the remedy to a better state of things, but as time passed on and brought its testimony in relation to a solution of the great problem he was inclined to look upon Henry George's plan favorably. From time to time he saw its applications in a new light, and he was watching the progress of the land doctrines with a lively interest. the Standard he regarded as the leading paper of its kind in the country, and he saw-that the new political forces were clustering about the banner that is upheld by the men demanding equal rights in the bounties of nature.


From A Man Who Thinks

He Does Not Believe Everything the Daily Newspapers Tell Him.

Chicago, Ill., April 6.—In a recent article on “Georgeism in Chicago,” the Tribune again displayed its utter ignorance of the subject it attempts to discuss. It is only necessary to point out one or two of its inconsistencies. For instance, it says that “persons having no property now pay no taxes!”Does not every man and woman in the United States pay taxes, and heavy taxes, too, on all they eat, drink, wear and use? Again, it speaks of the “government landlord” as being no better for the tenant than the private landlord. Is there no difference in paying one's rent into a fund of which he, with his wife and children, are joint owners, and paying rent to a private individual, who pockets it all?

The second closes with these words: “But as the land owners and lot owners and their sons are men who can fight and shoot, and who possess the overwhelming physical force of the nation, it would be difficult to imagine anything more chimerical than the conquest of the country by the disciples of Georgeism.” Ha! ha! The landlords talking of “fighting” and “shooting,” eh? Pretty good evidence, methinks, that the “chimera” of land reform is waxing mighty before those “'fighters” and “shooters.”

Charles W. Phillips.


It in the Situation Which has Changed

San Francisco Call.

The value of land, like everything else, is what people will give for it. Seven or eight years ago, when tho immigration was light and speculators had bought more land than they could pay for, the supply was in excess of the demand, and excellent land was offered at $20 and even $10 an acre, without takers. This same land is now held at $50 and $75 an acre, and finds buyers at the price. The land is the same as it ever was; it is the situation which has changed.


And You'll Find He is Practically Right, Too

New York Insurance.

We have read Mr. George's books, and every week read his paper, with great interest and some carefulness; and we are impressed by his deep earnestness, his honest boldness and his great ability. Moreover, we are inclined to think him theoretically right.


Life In France

Various Phases Of The Social Condition

The Outcome of Protection. The Distribution of Food 10 the Working Classes. The Position of the French Bar.

Special to the Standard.

Bordeaux, April 9.— France is passing through very severe period of commercial depression, and among our politicians the cry for "fair trade" is often heard. The ribbon trade of St. Etienne, which until quite recently seemed to be saved from the ravages of commercial depression, now finds itself cruelly hit, and the factories of that town are issuing less than half their usual output. This state of things is in part brought about by the severe competition of other nations, and in part by the arbitrary dictates of prevailing fashions. Until plain colors came into vogue, the ribbons of St. Etienne had almost a monopoly in the markets of the world. This is now changed, as the manufacturers of Switzerland and Germany have commenced to introduce a large proportion of cotton among the costlier tissue, and the ribbons when made up appear almost as good as those of St. Etienne, the consequence being that Franco is undersold even in her own markets. The merchants of St. Etienne are at their wits' end, for the protective duty on cotton entering this country is sufficiently heavy to practically prohibit its use; indeed, ribbons partly composed, of that commodity cost an enhanced price in production. “If the industry is not to be entirely ruined,” say the manufacturers, “the duty on cotton must be greatly reduced, if not abolished altogether, when it is imported for the manufacture of ribbons.” The outlook for this important branch of trade is extremely . serious, and the manufacturers find that it is as difficult a proceeding to change the law as to alter the fashions.

A short time ago a committee (acting under the auspices of Dr. B. W. Richardson) was formed in England to find out the best method to be adopted in the preparation and distribution of cheap foods for the people. The object was a most righteous one and merited every success. It is stated in the report of the committee of workingmen who have specially studied the question that any new scheme should include the establishment of public, kitchens and depots at which meals could be eaten and from which they could be supplied. to workshops, factories and private houses. In point of fact, the recommendations simply name a system of dealing with the feeding of the masses that is commonly adopted in this city. At most of the large wine cellars and factories of Bordeaux there is an immense open fireplace erected, and the employers of labor give directions for a big fire to be lighted some time before the hour for breakfast and dinner, in order that the workmen may be able to cook their meals. This is a great boon to those who reside at a distance from their place of labor, as it enables them to have a good hot dinner for the, mere trouble of cooking it, and renders it unnecessary that the drinking saloon should be resorted to. Now, whatever other shortcomings the French ounrier possesses, he is not a drunkard, and consequently, instead of spending his hard-earned wages on a totally unnecessary supply of beer and other alcoholic liquors, he generally provides himself with a satisfying and varied meal. The kitchens and depots that, according to Dr. Richardson's committee, ought to be public institutions, aided, it is to be presumed, by voluntary or forced contributions, are here made into successful private business speculations. and the people who undertake seriously the trade of providing meals for the working classes often reap to themselves a substantial living, and in course of time a respectable sum to retire on. This seems to be what is wanted in England.

Wishing to see for myself the style of living that exists among the poorest French workingmen, I donned an old suit, neglected to shave myself and to wash my face, and sauntered toward the docks. I passed a good many inferior feeding-places, where the words “On sert a bo ire et a mawgrer,” indicated that dinners were to be obtained, until at last, finding a shabby restaurant that seemed to be pretty full of dockyard laborers, I entered. There were no table-cloths, and the list of dishes to be obtained was chalked on a blackboard against the wall, the prices being noted against each dish. There were, at least, from twelve to sixteen different dishes of food to choose from, and all at a very low price. I had a satisfying dinner at every cheap rate, and as it was my intention simply to partake of the same viands that my neighbors ordered, the bill of fare may be taken as fairly representing the ordinary dinner of the French workman. By dint of repeated hard knocks on the table the attention of the overworked waiter was called, and he threw down a knife, spoon and fork. The spoon and fork were of Britannia metal. The meal consisted of a large plate of vegetable soup, cost two cents; a very large piece of bread, two cents; a plate of red baricot beans (far more than I could (the quantity being ample for an ordinary man), cost four cents; a plate of rice, one cent; and half a bottle of vin ordinaire, cost four cents; so that it will be seen a very fair dinner was provided for fifteen cents, with half a bottle of wine included. The French cheap restaurants supply private houses, and many small families find it more convenient to procure their daily meals from these sources than to have the cooking done at home.

Although the scale of lawyers' retaining fees is distinctly reasonable, and the general question of remuneration such as to give little ground for complaint from suitors in French courts of law, a Parisian journal has severely criticized the antiquated regulations that are still in vogue in connection with the admission of new members to the French bar—regulations which have the tendency of deterring many able men from catering the profession, who might otherwise become some of its most brilliant ornaments. In England the heavy expenses, social and official, with which the earlier portions of a barrister's career are environed practically prevent men of small means from undertaking that particular calling; but in France the obstacles in ti»e way are of an entirely different character. The French bar is spoken of in the series of articles referred to as “a truly archaic institution, possessing a code of administrative anomalies that have survived all the reforms carried out in France since the revolution.” Before access to the bar can be obtained it is a sine qua non that the name of the candidate shall have been already inscribed upon the list of avocats; and even all those who have passed all the necessary examinations, and obtained the degrees that are required before the profession of an avocat can be exercised, must be officially received by the bar council, a despotic body, whose decisions cannot be appealed against. It is maintained that many of the decisions are glaringly unjust, being dictated by purely personal considerations. This absurd regulation often causes great discontent, and many capable and learned men desert the legal profession on the very threshold of their admittance to the Palas de Justice, imagining that they have a grudge against society, when society has had nothing whatever to do with the decrees that have intercepted their legal career. Foreigners—as indeed in almost all things here are singled out for especially hard treatment. In those cases where a foreigner has to plead a case against a Frenchman, he is unable to place his case in the hands of a member of the bar who happens to belong to his own nationality; he is rigidly shut out from employing foreigners; and however much his cause might benefit from the employment of a special pleader having a large technical knowledge of the question in dispute, he is absolutely forbidden to give a I brief to any but a Frenchman. The natural result is that all foreigners who have settled in France are kept out of a profession which they might adorn. A considerable amount of correspondence has passed on the subject, and it has been suggested (the suggestion having received influential support) that, in the case of a committee of examiners, duly appointed by the government, having granted a certificate of their ability to speak French fluently, foreigners, otherwise well qualified, should not be shut out from undertaking the profession of a barrister. There is not much likelihood, however, that the legal authorities will voluntarily reign or diminish the judicial powers they at present possess.

Arnold Dickson.


Father Higgins' Lecture

Dr. McGlynn Good-Humoredly Demolishes His Reverend Cincinnati Critic.

Cincinnati Telegram, April 14.

A short time before Dr. McGlynn's departure a Telegram representative asked him what he thought of Father Higgins' lecture. Dr. McGlynn: replied promptly: “Father Higgins is evidently a gentleman of learning and culture, and no doubt every way a very estimable clergyman, but it is perfectly clear that his judgment of this question has been badly warped by prejudice. “I should be very sorry to be guilty of charging him with willful, conscious, mental dishonesty, but it certainly does seem to me that his whole argument would indicate that it was the production of a man who had  started out with a foregone conclusion, and then sought eagerly all manner of arguments, good, bad and indifferent, rather than make inquiry as a seeker after truth for its own sake alone, without any prejudice whatever, with the single resolve to follow it whither-soever it should lead him.

“I was forcibly-reminded while listening to the lecture of a statement which Mr. George was able to make in a preface to one of the later editions of his great work, namely, that he had failed as yet to see any argument alleged against the book that had not already been fully answered in the book itself.

“I may without indiscretion be permitted to say that an estimable gentleman of the city has told me that an exceptionally intelligent Catholic lady who had read Mr. George's works, and could see for herself no escape from the cogency of his reasoning, and yet thought that while so many good and supposed-to-be-learned men were opposing his conclusions there must be strong and valid arguments against them, went eagerly to hear Father Higgins give, I suppose, the very same lecture; and after hearing his arguments surrendered herself entirely to the conclusions of Mr. George.

“I have heard it seriously proposed by some of our friends this morning that it would be a good thing if the Henry George club of this city would publish Father Higgins' lecture as a tract in the work of propaganda.

“Father Higgins more than once sneered at the rhetoric of Mr. George, at his glittering phrases, and said and implied that Mr. George is carried away by his fancy, and that his rhetoric was exceedingly sophistical. I would say, with all courtesy, that this description, in my mind, applies with perfect justice to Father Higgins himself, and that a careful, honest, dispassionate perusal of Mr. George's works will show that he is an ardent worshiper of the truth, and is willing to follow it, no matter at what sacrifices of prejudice or previous conviction, and no matter at what inconvenience to himself.

“A notable and lamentable omission of Father Higgins' argument was the omission to discuss the question of the 'unearned increment.' He simply dismissed it with a sneer. He said nothing of what is so large a part of the whole question, namely: The enormous value that comes to land, particularly in great cities when it ceases to be thought of as having any agricultural value.

“It was a strange waiving of a great part of the issue to confine himself as he did to the mere question of agricultural lands. The whole of his argument, as far as it had any value, simply went to prove what Mr. George had asserted, and proved far more ably and eloquently, namely, that a man has a right to his improvements and to whatsoever he produces by his own industry.

“It, was a falsehood to say or imply that Mr. George would deprive the farmer of a perfect equivalent or compensation for anything that his labor has pat into the soil. Mr. George, as much as Father Higgins, is an advocate of undisturbed possession of portions of land by individuals. and it was the leading fallacy of Father Higgins throughout that he failed to distinguish between the two utterly distinct things—possession and ownership.

“Father Higgins found indefeasible title to land in the fact that a man had sowed a crop or dug a drain. What a pity that he didn't tell us something of the title that, as he implied, was thereby created to the whole ground underlying the surface, down to the very center, including all that it may contain in the shape of coal, marble, gold, silver and natural gas.

“It was fortunate, for the sake cf truth and justice, that Father Higgins gave copious extracts from the works of Mr George himself. If the lecture shall be published as he gave it, we shall have the comfort of knowing that whatever poison it contains will carry with it the antidote.”


Minneapolis Organizing

A Number of Good Men Are Pushing the Good Work and Expect to Make a Formidable Party

Minneapolis, Minn., April 13.—A number of men who are zealous in the cause of appropriating land values for public purposes held another meeting here last night and much earnestness was displayed. We went into organization and elected officers, and have formulated plans for organization in all the wards and precincts. m the city. Earnest men are busy circulating the platform for signatures and collecting residents of the precincts together to form separate clubs, from which are to be elected representatives to a central committee. As we have no elections near at hand we have little opposition from the established parties. The interior of the state is ready for the harvest, too, and we expect to do efficient work.

A. D.


Five-sixths of Us Are Tools

Philadelphia, April 16.—If one-sixth of the people of this country own all the land of the country, and, if furthermore, they have a perfect right to do as they please with it, either let it- stand idle a season or two or cultivate it according as whim or caprice might dictate, then we, the five-sixths, are entirely in the landowners' grasp and at their mercy and must be a surplus population. These land-owning fellows must have been lucky in being born in the year one and having the first grab. We, the landless majority, are a submissive lot, not even so much as owning a share of the ground we stand upon. It's a ludicrous position, is it not.

Jos. Beaumont.


A Word From Miss Helen Taylor.

London, Eng.—the Standard is regularly received and as regularly read. I was particularly pleased to see a sensible article on the Mormons and on the United States government attack on them.

Helen Taylor.


Rapid Transit

The Result Of The Thoughtless Granting Of Franchises.

How the Elevated Roads Have Driven Up Rents in Harlem—Single Lots Held at $25,000 to $73,000—A Poor Man's Village Transformed into a Rich Man's City—What the Future Holds in Store.

New York Star, April 17.

The rapid growth of Harlem in population, buildings, wealth and influence during the past few years is simply wonderful, even in this country where cities have sprung up like mushrooms, in a night, and where the wilderness has suddenly been replaced by teeming communities. Less than a quarter of a century ago Harlem was an humble suburban village with miles of divert country intervening between it and the city of New York, then an insignificant, town when compared with the present magnificent metropolis of the western hemisphere.

The village of Harlem proper then extended from about 118th street to the toil bridge and from Second to Fourth avenues. On some of the cross streets further to the west were many pretty cottages and some more pretentious dwellings. The few thousand inhabitants required but two polling places for election purposes, and their modest wants were supposed by a single dry goods store and a few other tradesmen. The people formed a law abiding church going community in the main, and were justly proud of their pleasant village, albeit it had but few brick houses and not a single brownstone front nor a plate glass show window in any of its stores.

The value of real estate was absurdly low as compared with the prices that now prevail. Cottages on the cross streets could be bought for $1,000 and upward, and a whole block on. Third avenue could he purchased for half the money that is now demanded for a single lot. Rents were correspondingly low. A neat cottage could be hired for $10 or $12 a month, and it was a fine house indeed that rented for more than $400 a year. The rent paid for the large store and dwelling on the southwest corner of 12th street and Fourth avenue in 1863 would not commence to pay the tax bill of last year, and the annual rent now paid for certain other houses would have purchased them a quarter of a century ago.

After the close of the war there was quite a boom in building in Harlem. Lots were much sought after for building and speculative purposes, and prices went up with a rush. The. period from 1865 to 1873 may be designated as the era of the "skin builders," as they were called, and most of the houses built at that time were very faulty in construction. Nevertheless they sold rapidly and at high prices. The panic that followed Black Friday had most disastrous results in Harlem. The ''skin builders" and the capitalists who backed them were engulfed in one common ruin, the price of real estate fell off one-half, and a general lethargy took the place of the activity that had prevailed.

Harlem was a dull place until the elevated railroad went into operation in 1878. Then the attention of capita lists and those seeking homes was attracted to it, and the price of real estate began to advance. Then began the transformation scene which in a few brief years has changed the quiet suburban village into a thriving business mart, has increased the population of the place more than tenfold and has covered a vast territory with pleasant homes. When the builders commenced their operations in 1879 attention was first paid to the vacant plots in the more settled portions of the place, but it was,not long before the larger extent of territory to the westward of Fourth avenue and the recently filled in, swamps and water courses of south Harlem were invaded. The demand was so sudden and so great that the price of eligible lots doubled at once, and they have been advancing steadily ever since. The demand for houses was so great as to stimulate building operations on a large scale, and hundreds of houses were soon in course of construction. The enormous advance in the prices of lots made it impossible to construct a house that could be rented for a moderate price, and flats were constructed to meet the demand. These were soon built in great numbers and of every class. from the palatial apartment house, with every known appliance for comfort and convenience, to the more humble tenement house. The demand for houses at moderate prices for permanent investment by people who desired to make Harlem their home was such as to exceed the possible supply. The many three-story brownstone fronts of west Harlem were the result of this demand.

Meantime the tenements for the poorer classes, great four and five-story structures with accommodations for sixteen to twenty families, were building on the waste places in south Harlem. These houses, often built by the block, now cover the section below ll0th street almost solidly, and have made south Harlem distinctly the home of the laboring class. The Third avenue elevated railroad divides Harlem, as far as the advance in the price of real estate and the character of building improvements are concerned, into two distinct sections. The eastern section has felt the boom to a certain extent, but where prices have doubled on the east side they have quadrupled and even quintupled on the west side, and where one dollar has been expended on improvements in the east ten dollars have been spent on the west. The eastern section has been given over to houses and flats for people of moderate means, and some day will be absorbed by the demands of commerce and manufactures.

The western section of Harlem, extending from Fourth avenue to Eighth avenue, and from ll6th street to 133d street, may be styled the “gilt edged” district, as here are found nothing but first-class dwellings, all well and expensively built, and some of them fine specimens of architecture. Brown stone is the prevailing material and simplicity is the general rule, but here; and there are innovations in the way of the and terra cotta, and there are numerous specimens of elaborate architecture of a striking character. In the district there are very few vacant lots, and they are destined soon to be occupied by first-class houses, as the price of the land is so high that it will not pay to erect any other class of buildings upon it. The apartment houses in the district are, many of them, very extensive and elegant in their appointments. Among them may be mentioned the "Daikeith," a magnificent seven-story structure at the northeast corner of Madison avenue and 124th street. The “Astor,” on 128th street, between Fifth and Sixth avenues, is also seven stories high, with twenty-eight apartments. This building is the tallest in Harlem, being over 100 feet high. Wright's flats on Sixth avenue and 127th street are elegant building, and the apartments command very high rents. On 116th street are the “Belvedere,” a handsome single flat near Pleasant avenue; the “Congress,” the “Pleasantville,” and Muller's handsome new flats near Second avenue. These flats have a broad court between them and are especially attractive.

Of private houses, the most conspicuous is the elegant gothic residence of Lucien C. Warner, on the northwest corner of I26th street and Fifth avenue. This building, constructed of brick and brown stone, is a most beautiful architectural specimen, and its appointments are elegant, throughout. The residence of Jordan L. Mott, corner of 330th street and Fifth avenue, is a magnificent pile of brick, and is one of the most spacious and elegant mansions in the city. It was erected by the late R. B. Connolly for a residence, but was never occupied by him. The large and stately brownstone mansion on the northeast corner of 126th street and Fifth avenue, built by Henry W. Genet, and owned and occupied by McLoughlin, the song publisher, is one of the most striking private residences in the city. The granite mansion on the corner of 119th street and Sixth avenue is a beautiful building. It is built in composite style, and is admired by all who see it. The Sherwood residence, on the Corner of Sixth avenue and 115th street, is a very large substantial building of simple but elegant construction, and very costly in all its appointments. Besides these splendid specimens of domestic architecture there are rows upon rows of first class houses of every style, all built of the best material and supplied with all the improvements known to the latest development of science and art.

Harlem is especially favored with fine churches, all of them, however, of comparatively recent construction. The finest is the Reformed church, Sixth avenue and 153d street, constructed of Ohio stone in pare Gothic style at a cost of $150,000. The Pilgrim church, corner of Madison avenue and 121st street, is a large and beautiful structure, built of brown stone and having a tall steeple. St. James' Methodist Episcopal church, 126th street and Madison avenue; St. Andrew's Episcopal, l27th street and Fourth avenue Holy Trinity, Fifth avenue and 125th street, and Trinity Methodist Episcopal, l18th street, are fine edifices.

There are some elegant business structure in Harlem. First among these is the large and imposing iron fireproof building on the corner of Third avenue and 121st street. This structure is 95 x 100 feet in extent and three stories high. and cost in the neighborhood of $150,000. The fine trick building on the corner of 122d street and Third avenue, recently erected by Alexander Bros., is a conspicuous feature. Other fine stores are those of Mrs. Torpey. Third avenue and 119th street; Lynch's glass front building, Third avenue, near 119th street, and the Horton building, Nos. 108 and 116 East 125th street. Louis Rangler is building a magnificent store at Third avenue and 125tb street, which will be the largest structure of any kind in Harlem.

The values placed upon real estate in Harlem are fully commensurate with the growth and importance of the place. Lots on Third avenue are held at $25,000 to $75,000, the latter being the offering price for the best corners. Freeborn. who owns the house and lot No. 2236 Third avenue, near 122d street, has ref used an offer of $55,000, and the house is comparatively valueless. Nauss Bros. recently paid $50,000 cash for the four story house No. 2291 Third avenue, and similar prices have been paid for other pieces of property. Lots on 125th street are held at $25,000. On the Sixth and Seventh avenue boulevard lots are held at $10,000 to $12,000, and on the cross streets in the gilt-edged district are valued at $8,000 to $12,000. The price demanded for houses varies with the location. East of Third avenue a comfortable home can be purchased for $5,000 to $15,000, while on the west side the prices run from $15,000 to $50,000, and even $75;000, which is asked tor some of the elegant houses recently constructed.

The booming in real estate is not yet over if the prediction of certain heavy operators prove correct. They say that in less than five years the cheapest lot on upper Third avenue will be worth $50,000, and that the value of all property in Harlem will advances fifty per cent in that time.


Why Australian Lands Lie Fallow

Thirty-two Owners to 1,523,238 Acres—Only the Smaller Farms Infiltrated to Any Extent.

Adelaide, South Australia, Register.

The figures given in an official paper recently issued show that out of over twelve millions of acres which the state in selling designed not for pastoral out for agricultural purposes, more than three- quarters of the whole area are unused each year for those purposes, though of course a much larger proportion is held by agriculturists. No figures are given regarding to holdings under one acre in extent. But the percentage of land under crop to the total area is stated in regard to all holdings of the different varieties of sizes. The actual working farming community are chiefly comprised among the holders of portions of land from 250 to 2,000 acres in extent. There are over 3,000,000 acres held in blocks between 500 and 1,000 acres in extent; about half that number between 200 and 500, and the same from 1,000 to 2,000. But the really cultivated land is scattered over the various descriptions of holdings in a manner that can be easily understood. People who hold from 100 to 1,000 acres do by far the best with their land, the smaller holding having to a slight extent the advantage, of these readily manageable farms the proportion actually under crop is forty per cent. That is the best percentage which South Australia yet has to show. The next best class of holdings is the extremely small, namely, from 1 to 20 acres. Then comes the class 20 to 36 acres with a percentage of 31; 1,000 to 2,000 with a percentage of 29; and 50 to 100 with 25 per cent. A few holdings up to 3,000 acres are fairly cultivated. But the rest are absolutely nowhere in the comparison. It is really deplorable to note how little use is made of some of the land supposed to have been sold primarily for agricultural purposes. Of the estates of 20,000 to 30,000 acres not one acre out of a hundred is cultivated. Of those from 30,000 to 40,000 acres about one-third of an acre is cultivated to every 100 acres, and of those beyond 40,000 about one-half to every 160. There are thirty-two holders of portions of land in South Australia who hold between them 1,523,258 acres, and of this only 6,565 acres are under crop.


A Tidal Wave of Protest

Philadelphia Protestant Standard.

We are pleased to see the reaction that has set in against the arbitrary assumptions of Rome in the matter of polities, and no true lover of liberty can refrain from muting with I the liberal Roman Catholics in this country in exclaiming with O'Connell, “As much religion as you like from Rome, but no politics. The voice of the people of New York comes in a mighty ground swell of protest. Like the tidal wave it has rolled over this land, and no earthly power is able to withstand it.


The Crusade in Florida

Pensacola, Fla., April 1.—the Standard is being read by many deep thinkers down in this section of the country, and poor theories of taxation and revenue are accepted by a great many. What we need now is organization for wider propagation of these views. The citizens of Florida are naturally slow to move in politics, when once they come to see a remedy for existing evils they will prove its sturdy advocates.

J. A. W.


He Joins the Great Crusade

Fonthill, Ontario, March 53.—I have long been at a loss to understand how “hard times” should result from “overproduction;” how, with the higher intelligence and superior inventions of our day, the workers of the world should be worse off than in a ruder civilization. The perusal of “Social Problems” has enabled me to see clearly where the evil lies.

E.F. Moore.


Value of Land in London

Land in the city of London, says the Marklane Express, seems to retain its almost incredible value. A freehold in Cheapside of only 296 square feet was lately sold for £14,050, or about 6s. 8d. per square inch, or more than £1,500,000 an acre.


Page 3


Queries And Answers

The Cause of Poverty

New York, April 2.—The following question has been asked me, with the request that it, be sent to the Standard for answer: Please state briefly the reasons for thinking that private ownership of land is the efficient cause of the poverty which exists in the United States.

Whether or not a brief answer to this question will be sufficient depends upon. the questioner's familiarity with elementary principles. Let him carefully read chapter, book 5 of “Progress and Poverty.”

The man who has only his labor to depend upon must seek an opportunity to work. In doing this he competes with a vast number of other men who have only their labor to depend upon and with machines that in large part do the work of men. If natural opportunities to work increased with increase of labor, this competition would be, in a measure, free; but the ownership of land, by limiting natural opportunities to work, gives to him who controls an opportunity an advantage over him who seeks one. The inevitable result is a downward tendency of wages, with its correlative, an upward tendency of land values. Upon the point to which these corresponding tendencies have at a given time advanced depends the degree of poverty. In the United States poverty has not yet reached the lowest degree; but it has advanced toward it with the increase of land values, and wherever land values are highest poverty is deepest.

If land values were taxed so that no one could benefit by merely holding land, not only would the public enjoy the benefit of land values, hut all land having no value for use (of which there is an abundance, since most vacant land values are speculative) would be free. This would offer an outlet for labor, and regulate competition for-opportunities to work. Then involuntary poverty would be impossible.


Farm Mortgages

Conway. Ran.—If a man works and saves $500 and lends it To a farmer on a mortgage on the farmer's land, how will the owner of the mortgage be affected if the principles of the land and labor party are carried out?

T. Hunt.


If the principles of the land and labor party were carried out suddenly and completely, that is, if taxes were shifted to land values and at once increased so as to absorb the entire value, the mortgagee would lose all his security, except the improvements. But the objects of this party, will be gradually accomplished. One tax after another will be shifted from private property to land values, until land values bear all taxes, and then taxes will be increased gradually until they absorb all land values. This process will press land values downward much as a gradual exodus of population would, and all losses, those of mortgageors as well as those of mortgagees, will be spread over a considerable period of time. No one would suffer anything like the loss that so many small owners now suffer in every real estate panic.


Abolish Interest

New York, Feb. 14.—If, as you claim, “Every man has an exclusive right to what is produced by his own labor, then it follows that no man has a right to what is not produced by his labor. Usurers base their right to exact interest on the ground that the money they lend contributes toward production. But labor produces everything, and as the right of property is determined by actual labor, capital being merely the result of labor, it has no right to share in what it produces. It was the perception of this truth which led Christ to drive the Hebrew money lenders out of the temple of Jerusalem, and inspired the words spoken by Antonio, the merchant of Venice, to the usurer Shylock, “If thou wilt lend this money, lend it not as to thy friend, for when did friendship take a breed of barren metal of his friend?” With such authorities as Christ and Shakespeare to support my claims it is hardly necessary to further elucidate. But the point I wish to make is this, Abolish interest, and capital will be forced into legitimate chattels of trade, and the army of the unemployed will be considerably reduced.

H. L. P.

Every man has an exclusive right to what his labor produces, and it follows, as you say, that no man has a right to what is not produced by his labor. But it does not follow that no man has a right to what is produced by the product of his labor. If a man domesticates a pair of pigeons, they are his property because, economically, he has produced them. But they in course of time will produce other pigeons, and these are his as well as the parent pair. They are the product of a product. If a man plow a field and sow it with grain, the field will at once have a certain value over the mere land value; but in a few months, without any more labor, the same field will have a still greater value. This additional value is the product of a product, and the secondary product belongs to the sower as well as the primary one. The secondary product is interest, and if you abolish it—or rather, if you change its ownership, for you can no more abolish interest than you can abolish comets—you abolish property in a labor product. It is quite true that barren metal, by which you mean money, owes not breed; but money is a representative of all such folios of capital as pigeons, battle and fields of planted grain, which do breed. If I lend you a calf for three years, you do not make me good at the end of that time by returning me a calf; you must give me a cow. Equally, if I lend you the value of a calf in money, you do not make me good by returning the value of a calf. If you give me back no more than I lent, you do not abolish interest; you simply appropriate it.

That men are forced to pay usury is quite true. But that is not interest on capital; it is the price of a monopoly. Debts being payable only with a certain medium, which is limited below the amount required, it commands a premium in certain cases. This premium is usury. The money changers whom Christ drove out of the temple supplied the only kind of money receivable at the temple, and by cornering the supply were able to charge exorbitant rates for it. That was not interest. The more thought you give to this subject the clearer it will appear that the monopoly of land values is the keystone to the whole arch of usury. Knock that out and freedom of contract will secure to everyone who works full wages for his labor, and to everyone who has capital full interest on it and no more, whether he uses or lends it. Such interest can harm no one. It is a product of capital and would not exist but for the capital, and it diminishes no one's wages.

It is not lack of capital that drives men into the army of the unemployed, for men can make capital, but lack of land, which no man can make. Lack of ships will not prevent men crossing the ocean so long as trees are to be had; but if you put a prohibitory price on trees men must either swim or stay ashore.


The Earning Point

The Voiks-zeitung, commenting on our answers to questions it propounded, asks what we mean by the “earning point” of wages.

The expression was used in two sentences. In one we said, “Wages will increase (the competition for workers continuing) until they reach the point of earnings:” and in the other, “Independence would lend to keep the supply of wage laborers below the demand, and consequently to sustain wages at the earning point.”

The earning point of wages can neither be expressed in figures nor marked on a diagram. It is the point at which that part of the product that is due to the laborer as such, and which is denominated “wages,” is separated from that which is due to the element of time in the use of capital, denominated “interest,” plus that which is due to superior natural or social advantages, denominated “rent.”

In primitive production, where there is no exchange and all land is free, the earning point of wages is the entire product. Though capital may be used, yet, as there is no exchange, there is no object in differentiating wages and interest. Nevertheless interest exists in theory even then.

When exchange becomes a factor in production, interest must be recognized as an element in distribution. a man, by planting a field with maize, may, with no further labor, but with mere lapse of time, have a field of ripened corn. If instead of doing this he supplies his community with boats. He must, in exchange for boats, be able to get as much standing corn as, with the same labor in the same period of time he could get by planting maize. In either case he gets something more than wages. If it would take the same labor to make a boat as to plant the field, he would exchange the boat for a newly planted field; and then the boat or the field, one equaling the other, would be his wages. But, by way of rough calculation, if the ripened corn would exchange for two boats, any one who had borrowed his boat and kept it during the time the corn was growing, must return, not one boat but two. If the borrower would not do that, the boatmaker would find it more profitable to plant corn than to lend boats, and any one who needed a boat immediately and had not a newly planted field to exchange for it, would be compelled to postpone using a boat, until he could either make one or plant a field to exchange for one. The second boat paid for the use of the first, like the difference in value between the newly planted and the ripened field of corn, would be interest on capital. In all these circumstances, the earning point of wages for the labor supposed remains the newly planted field or one boat.

But as population increased and exchange developed, some part of the earth's surface would be more desirable than other parts. For agricultural and mining purposes this greater desirability would depend in part. upon fertility and in part upon location; for exchange purposes it would depend wholly upon location. When all the best parts were occupied, population would be forced upon the less desirable land, and the more desirable would have a value. People would pay something out of their products for the privilege of using the better instead of the poorer opportunity. That payment would be rent. If land was privately owned it would go to the owner; if owned in common, to the community. In either case it would be paid out of wages and interest, for both wages and interest would be, in proportion to production, less than before. In these circumstances the earning point of wages would be determined by, first, deducting rent from product; and, second. Deducting interest from the remainder. Rent would be fixed by the difference in value between the best and the poorer land; and the relation between wages and interest by the average power of increase which attaches to capital from its use in reproductive modes, as explained in chapter 5, book 3 of “Progress and Poverty.”

Now, land being privately owned and demand for it obviously increasing, land speculators discount the future by taking up land in advance of demand for use. This puts a price on all natural opportunities and makes every bargain for laborers one-sided. The laborer, unable to buy land, has no recourse but to compete with fellow laborers for the privilege of working for an employer to mortgage future labor to a landlord for the right to work for himself. In that situation wages fall below the earning point. If land values were taxed so that it would he unprofitable to own land except for use, speculation would be destroyed and unused land would be free. This, by providing a ready outlet for labor, would, under the operation of the law of supply and demand, bring wages back to the earning point. The class of laborers that produce directly from the soil would not work for an employer for less than they could earn on the nearest free land, which in that case would not be far away, and their wages being the base, of the wages pyramid, would, on being thus increased, increase wages in all branches of industry.


An Illustration Wanted

Reading, Pa., April 11.—I am a firm believer in the theory that land values belong, of right, to all people. But when I talk on the subject to people who have never studied political economy, they frequently say that if a tax were imposed upon land values and all other taxes were remitted, the landlord would charge the tenant enough additional rent to reimburse him for the extra land tax. Your answer to this will probably be that a tax on land values cannot be added to rent, because rent is the difference between what can be made from any rentable piece of land and what can be made from the least productive land in use. Now, this answer does not appear to be conclusive to those who have no acquaintance with political economy. Cannot you furnish me with a clear illustration which I can use to show those who are not accustomed to exact reasoning and logical thought, that it will be impossible for landlords to shift the proposed land tax to the shoulders of their tenants?

Walter G. Yeager.


The mistake your friends make is in supposing that the cupidity of a landlord is the sole measure of rent. Tell them to think a little, and they will realize that what a landlord takes is not the full amount he would like to exact, but as nearly as possible what a tenant will consent to pay sooner than remove to a more inconvenient place or so out of business. There are men who own mineral lands and rent the privilege of mining. The measure of their rent is the amount which will leave the mining capitalist just profit enough to induce him to continue in the business of mining. If these profits rise, the rent is advanced; if they fall, he either gets a reduction of rent or stops mining. You can see at once that no matter how much of this rent might be taken in tax, the mine owner could fret nothing more out of the mine worker.

If you want an illustration here is one: John Smith goes to the North and South railway company, tells them that he wants to set up a sawmill at one of their stations, and wants to know what rate they will charge for bringing his lumber to market. They say ten dollars a thousand. Smith says, “That's too much; it won't leave me any profit. You must charge less or I won't put up the mill. I can't afford to pay more than six dollars.” “All right,” replies the railway, “we'11 carry your lumber for six dollars.” The state then taxes the railway one dollar on each thousand feet of lumber carried. The railway can't shift this tax onto John Smith by charging him seven dollars instead of six dollars, for if it did John Smith would cease to earn interest on his capital and would either mo v e his sawmill elsewhere or sell it for what it would bring.

Taxes on monopolies are always paid by the monopolist, because he is already getting from the consumer every cent the consumer can afford to pay and cannot by any possibility get any more. Taxes on competition are paid by the consumer, because the effect of competition is to so reduce prices as to leave a margin between what the consumer actually does pay and what he can afford to pay, and this margin is the limit of the tax that can be collected from him.

There is just enough truth in the idea that landlords can shift taxes to their tenants to mislead unless you explain one thing. A tax on real estate has a tendency to so shift, in part. This, as you understand, is because part of it falls upon the improvements, which are products, and must be paid by the tenant—the consumer—or house building will be discouraged; but the part that falls on the value of the land is a tax on monopoly, and is borne by the owner. He cannot shift that.


Regulation of Values

Brooklyn, April 5.—As by the adoption of your principles the comparative value of one piece of land to another would no longer be determined by individual freedom of exchange in conjunction with the laws of individual supply and demand, how do you propose to regulate the amount of the tax on each occupier?

Frederick W. Crook.

The adoption of our principles of taxation would not interfere with the determination of land values by freedom of exchange. It would have no other effect, in this respect, than to destroy speculative values. Real estate would have a market value, but unused land would not. Real estate values are in part improvement values and in part land values; therefore the market value of any piece of real estate, minus the value of the improvement, would be the value of the land. Upon the latter value the tax would be laid.


A Mechanic's Question

Albany, April 3.—I am a mechanic in the iron trade, earning in this country $3 per day. When working in England at the same trade I only received $1.50. In other parts of Europe in the same trade the pay is less. Suppose, now, laws were passed making trade absolutely free with other countries. What would prevent my wages and those situated like me from going down to European prices?

E. A. N.

Nothing hut what prevents them now. It is not the protective tariff that makes your wages better than those of European mechanics, if they are better; it is because they are not, all things considered, enough better than in England to tempt English mechanics in the iron trade to make a journey across the ocean and compete for your job in sufficient numbers to bring down your wages. A tariff on foreign workmen would have a tendency to give you higher pay for what. you do, but a tariff on foreign goods only has a tendency to make you pay more for what you consume. It would be no less difficult for foreign workmen to come here if the tariff were abolished than it is now; therefore competition for work in your trade would be no keener and your Wages no lower. But it would be less expensive for foreign goods to come here, and therefore the cost of your living would be less. Read chapters 19, 23 and 24 of “Protection or Free Trade?”



Albany, N. Y.—(1) If under our; present land system the protective tariff was abolished, would not the condition of the working classes be worse' (2) How is money first brought into circulation?

Louis Meyer.

(1) No. Read chapters 19, 23 and 24 of “Protection, or Free Trade?” (2) Some of it, after being stamped by government on its own material, is paid out in satisfaction of government obligations, while some of it after being stamped on material belonging to individuals is returned to the. Owners of the material.


The Incidence of Taxation

Kearney, Neb.—I am studying land reform and hoping for its success; but I am not, fully convinced that the remedy advocated in the Standard is the true one. I am greatly puzzled with certain questions relating, first, to political economy, and .second, to the details of the remedy and its effects. At present I would like lo present some of the former. .It is evident that our tariff and internal revenue duties are ultimately paid by the consumer. (1) Are taxes on manufacturing establishments paid by consumers of the articles manufactured? (2) Is capital in general able to shift any burden placed upon it to the shoulders of those who consume wealth? (3) Can a tax on land values be likewise shifted from the farmer to the consumer of farm products? (4) Is a man who lends money on real estate a capitalist?


(1) Yes; and also interest on the taxes.

(2) Yes.

(3) No; nor from the owner of any kind of land to the consumer of the products of that land.

(4) In his relations as a mere lender of capital, he is a capitalist; in his relations as alien or on real estate, he is an owner of real estate, and therefore a capitalist to the extent of his lien on the improvements, and a landlord to the extent of his lien on the land.


Question of a Knight of a Labor

St. Louis, Mo., April 3.—As I understand the George land theories, under his system of taxation the value of land will not increase except with increase of population or transfer of population from one locality to another, or by reason of the discovery of valuable mine or deposits. I quote from “Progress and Poverty,” chapter 2, page 176: “The coal and iron beds of Wyoming and Montana, which today are valueless, will, in fifty years from now, be worth millions on millions, simply because, in the meantime, population will have greatly increased.”

Suppose that in a farming community there has been no increase of population, no unearned increment.  A wishes to cultivate, in addition to what he already has, ten acres of land which adjoins his farm and is being used by B. C also wishes to tack this same ten acres to his farm. The land of B has been improved by his exertion, making it more valuable than it was. Does not the land, or farm, become more valuable by reason of A and C desiring it than it was before B improved it? If A or C agree before to pay a little more taxes than B is paying for the use of the ten acres, how will B be remunerated for the improvements that he has placed on the land?

K. Perry Alexander.

You have in mind evidently the idea of government leasing, a system which is not contemplated by Henry George's plan of land value taxation. Under his plan if A wanted B's ten acres he would try to buy it of him, improvements and all; and C, also wanting it, would do the same. B would sell to the one who came to his terms. If that were the only transaction, land values in that community would not be materially affected: but if there were several transactions like it, or if that transaction influenced the selling price of neighboring farms, so that farms were held, after deducting value of improvements, at a higher price than before, there would be an additional unearned increment, and the land value tax in that neighborhood would rise accordingly. If B could not afford to hold his land after its value increased, which would be exceedingly improbable, he would sell the land and improvements together to some one who could, and either buy land and improvements elsewhere, though not necessarily far away, or take up vacant land, also near at hand, and improve it. In no case would he lose his improvements, because the value of his land would always be determined by the difference between the value of the improvements and the selling value of the farm. If the selling value of the farm, minus the value of the improvements, was less than his basis of taxation that would show conclusively that his tax was too high and he would be entitled to a reduction. In special instances a man might temporarily be taxed some what too much or too little, but in general the land value tax would operate automatically so as to justly distinguish communal from individual values; and even in special instances inequalities would be less in degree and fewer in number than now, while the remedy would be speedier and more exact.


Queen Victoria's Jubilee

Some of the Methods by Which Money Is Being Raised—Hateful Jubilee Begging

London Democrat.

The fact is that from first to last the jubilee has been the jest of reasonable people; but there is more than fun in it. Attempts have been made to raise money in a manner that is flat treason to the spirit, if not to the letter, of our laws. The poor rank and file soldiers of our army, who get the shots where some one else gets the glory, have been asked to contribute to the fund. When a colonel requests a “full private” for a subscription, we all know that request and refusal are spelt in a manner differing from the orthodox fashion. It is notorious that in this instance request and compulsion have a meaning almost the same, contrary to the dictionary. How many of these poor fellows are republicans, who regard the person of Queen Victoria with the same reverence as they regard the queen of Madagascar? Yet some of these will have to yield to the request so kindly made that they should join in this great free offering of a loving people.

In many other cases the jubilee begging has become hateful even to the loyal and enthusiastic beggars. One lady who went begging found out so many districts in which the poor could not afford even a penny that she retired in disgust from her tusk. One man answered a reply for a penny request by saying, “I've no pennies to spare for the queen tonight, I'm sure. Pin out of work, and will have to go out and beg pennies for my little children my self to give them all food.”

Now, that is what is felt through all the land. That the richest lady in the world should send out begging from these miserable and destitute people is felt to be an outrage on common sense and common decency. It used to be the custom in other days for him who had been prosperous to give to the poor. Queen Victoria, because she has been prosperous for fifty years, wishes to take from the poor. It is a strange met hod of returning thanks to God, thus to spoil God's poor. That feeling outrages the pious and disgusts the worldly, and that feeling is making the jubilee a failure.

But it is significant that while a feeling is so wide and deep it finds a first expression among the more active parts of our British empire. Englishmen feel, Scotchmen speak, Irishmen and “Welshmen act. And so while in England men have been laughing at all the fuss and absurdity, in Scotland they have been asking why such things should be, but in Ireland and Wales they have been taking active measures against them. In Dublin an actively loyal member of the corporation moved that an address be presented to her majesty. The lord mayor moved an amendment, and the address was lost by 33 votes to 3. In South Wales the Cardiff trades council was invited to subscribe. The gentlemen composing that body wrote in reply that they mu«t ref use to do anything in servile adulation of a “well paid servant of the state.” That was patriotism as opposed to loyalty.


Our Brothers in Germany

Martin Hildebrandt, editor of Land, a German paper devoted to land nationalization, writes from Forst, N. L.. Germany: “I have won over to our cause a daily pa per in this place, and work with tongue and pen in the hope of currying the next reichstag election in this district. This is the first year of our young land league, which already can point to this much progress that land nationalization is already a familiar theme in Germany, about which one cannot allow himself to speak us if it were Utopian idea, but with the respect which is due to it.” Land is published in Berlin, Schlegdstrasse No. 4. German Americans who feel interested in the progress of this movement in the Fatherland can order the paper direct or through the Standard. Remittances should be, if to Germany direct, four marks; if to the Standard, $1.10


A Chance for a Beginning

New York, April 19.— The United States has the opportunity to try on a grand settle the plan of making the land the common property of the community in the cases of the Indian territory and Alaska. To allow settlers to take up for use the kind in either of those territories would be a benefit to the inhabitants already there, and would go far to settle finally the Indian question.  Let no government in either of those territories, but let anybody occupy the land and pay its rental value.



Life In A French Village

Children Earning Two Cents a Day—Mothers and Daughters Working in the Fields—Milk and Eggs to be Sold, Not Eaten

Frances M. Lathrop in the Christian Union.

. . . Strolling one morning toward the village, I entered it by an outlying street. Alas for my long treasured belief in romantic peasant village! It was shattered at the first touch. The street was lined with low huts built of coarse stones roughly plastered in the manner usual everywhere in France. Wide open doors and windows showed gloomy depths of squalor, poverty and discomfort that struck me with the force of a sudden blow. The street was encumbered with rubbish, while directly in front of my houses masses of manure piled in huge square heaps in all stages of decay confronted the eye. On these heaps, under the very windows of the family rooms, great troops of hens and chickens were plying an unceasing industry of picking up an honest living. These pestilential mounds were numerous enough to make the air intolerable; but I went on, hoping to come upon some traces of that homely beauty seen in the work of painters who find never ending subjects in peasant life and have created for us its ideal charm. “Can human beings be born, live their lives, and die in the midst of such foulness?” was my first thought. What becomes of the theory of disease, especially typhoids, induced by decaying matter, in the face of this evidence to the contrary? For in this village, and many others since visited, the people wear a look of health, and very aged women seem especially numerous. The old allusion to the rustic who has never been out of sight of the paternal dunghill acquires true force after one tour through a French village. At every other door women and children were seated at lace-making, their fingers flying among the bobbins with incredibly swift movement. The simple peasant dress and white cap of every woman and little girl alike bears the likeness to those figuring with much effect at fancy dress balls and church fairs, but is as yet far enough from the fashions of Paris to lend a certain quaintness to their appearance. For a moment these white-capped lace-makers restored my ideal of a happy, picturesque peasantry, the absence of which in our own land has deeply afflicted at least one American novelist. I stopped to watch the fingers weaving subtleties of linen threads so deftly as to make the work seem an instinctive sleight-of-hand rather than a simple domestic art, and fell into a little talk with the workers. A little girl of eight years was making a lace known as torchon. As I looked at her tiny fingers a woman came up and spoke sharply to the child for letting the pillow-shaped frame, used in lace-weaving, slip a little out of her lap. A smart rap on the ear, with the words, “Sois pas bete,” roused my sympathy. I asked how much this child could earn. “If she works well the whole day she can gain two cents,” was the reply. An old woman, who said she was over eighty years of age, with dim eyes and skin shriveled to an incredibly creased and leathery substance, said that her sole means of living was lace making, by which she could make six cents a day.

“And what food can you buy for so little?” I asked.

“Bread, and some kinds of vegetables,” said the poor old creature.

The young and skilled workers can earn from twelve t o twenty cents, but of the latter there are few. In many visits among these poor people I learned something of the system which permits a country to possess a picturesque peasantry. In families numbering ten and twelve members, not one is an idler. From the grandmother of eighty to a child of seven, each must contribute to the common stock of money.

The mother, with her grown daughters, works in the fields during the early morning hours—from 4 o'clock to 10—the rest of the day being given to household work and lace making, or some other money giving labor. One of the chief industries of the village is covering buttons with a network of crochet. Seven to ten cents may be earned in this way in a day.

In friendly chat the women gave details of their every day life, with none of the pride which conceals poverty and hardship among the poor of our own land. The first meal of the day is a bit of dry bread.

“What! no coffee?” real exclaimed.

A derisive laugh went round the little ground near me.

“Coffee? No, indeed!”

“But after this early morsel you have a good dinner at noon?”

“Yes; we have soup. bread and vegetables.” But note the soup, which is made from the water in which the vegetables have been boiled. Cabbage, carrots, potatoes, beaus, and cold scraps left from meals are boiled together. To these is added a slice of “lard.” as it is called. meaning salt pork. This scrap of pork is hardly sufficient to give one truthful to each one at table. The vegetables are all removed from the soup pot and eaten separately. The soup is well seasoned and is not unpalatable. however lacking in nutritive quality. Supper is a second edition of the dinner.

“But,” said I, “you have milk and eggs, for I see cows and hens?”

“Yes; but they will bring money and we cannot eat what will bring money for clothing and to keep us in winter.”

“Do you not have meat sometimes?”

Jamais, jamais de la viande!” was the chorus.

But in other talks with the better class of villagers I learned that on great fete days they went to the extent of buying around or two of mutton or veal. The luxuries of sugar, butter, cheese, coffee, etc. are too rare to be counted among the food of the poorer people. Chicory and roasted beaus furnish a substitute for coffee. In each town there are fields or narrow strips of land that are leased by the town to men who cannot own a bit of garden; and hero are grown the vegetables which form so important a part of the food. A second field is sometimes leased for growing grains. The vineyards of this region are few and of scanty luxuriance, and little wine is consumed by the poor people. A large brewery furnishes beer at three cents a litre (two quarts). I was surprised to learn that in many parts of France, especially in Normandy, large quantities of a thin cider are made, which the peasants drink with a dilution of one-half water. This very mild  beverage supersedes the use of wine among poorer peasants.  In the whole village of Vittel, with 1,500 inhabitants, not a single wine shop is to be found, spirits and wine being sold only at the hotels or at the village cafe, a very ancient stone structure where the dining room walls are completely covered with growing ivy, lending a fresh, summer-like appearance to this haunt of the local bons vivants. In this room I read the quatrain below, which is cut in a stone of the wall over the date 1663:

Les amysde de co temps

Resemblent les melons;

Faut gouster un cent

Pour en trouver un bon—

a sentiment bearing equally hard on the host and his convives and a reminder that the world and melons were no better in 1663 than in 1885.

Not to leave this somber picture without relief, it must be said that here and there one finds a peasant family who have by great energy and good luck reached a state of modest competence. I became interested in one such family, of which Claire, a girl of thirteen, had been employed in some lace needle work for us, which was the occasion of several visits to her father's house. Claire had informed me, with evident pride, that her father was marechal of Vittel, a title indicating military distinction, but when translated “farrier” was at once shorn of its apparent high significance, though not of its importance in the eyes of the family. The house was one of the usual stone and coarse mortar kind, but larger than common, and the family numbered twelve members, from a red-cheeked grandmother of eighty to a child of seven years. I was a beehive without a drone.

Several grown daughters were seamstresses, making fine shirts. dresses, etc., for the people cf the village, and were skilled operators on their American sewing machine. These young girls, comely, finely shaped, and I one of them possessed of real beauty, were not above the field work in which they had been trained; and from 4 o'clock to 9 in the morning they took their allotted tasks in the fields. The property of their father. After 9 o'clock the sewing began for the day's work. The father, a fine specimen of health and vigor, seemed to possess a versatility in uniting several industries more rarely met in his class in France than with us. where jacks-of-all-trades flourish abundantly. He had been to the Paris exposition universelle, and there had seen the wonders of American agricultural machines, which he had at once introduced among the farmers of the district, himself becoming agent for several famous mowers, reapers and other machines. I was taken all over the house, through the workshop and cow house, piggery, grain and hay lofts—-all under one roof. The not impervious partition wall of the sty adjoined the room of the grandmother—a fact of which one was forcibly made aware by the odors of that room, which was otherwise of exceptional cleanliness, and filled with tine old furniture black with the constant polishings of a century. In the kitchen stood an oak dresser of huge dimensions, displaying the gayly painted household faïence of sixty years ago, with not a piece lacking or one defaced by nicks, showing a refined care of precious things worthy of all praise and imitation by reckless housekeepers of our day. The pride of the whole family was a son who had gone to Paris and become a soldier of the republic. The last better from this son was produced and handed to me to read. It was truly a cleverly written letter: the chirography perfectly finished and flowing, wholly unlike the unformed hand of an uneducated youth, and full of humorous sallies, directed in turn to each member of the household. In the first pages of the letter the young soldier alluded to some great event about to occur. working up the point dramatically in a strong way; on the next page or two there was a new date, and the announcement that, whereas yesterday the writer of the first page was a simple soldier of the lowest grade in the service, he, their son, was today a “suos-officier,” which is the first step in promotion. Ho then hinted that. he should expect nothing less than the laughter of the failed calf in his honor. I had already seen the fatted calf which was a year old, and of goodly size. The joy and pride of this simple, good family in their soldier was without bounds. From thenceforth his letters were sent to me to peruse, in the full belief that my interest in the youth was second only lo theirs. The fatted calf was metaphorically killed, that is, sold, and a due portion of the money sent to the soldier boy, who acknowledged his receipt of the “morsel of veal,” us he called it, in a bright and merry letter, which Claire brought to the hotel for my reading.

Every family fete day was the occasion of a feast. with little gifts and much sentiment Claire, my little seamstress, was assistant in the village school where orphans were taught and eared for tenderly by several good sisters of charity. Claire's two younger sisters were pupils also in the same school; and after school hours all had their task ofbutton crochet or needle work to be done before  rest or play could be dreamed of. No limit can possibly be fixed to the good consequent upon such early instilled industry and habitual thrift, or the art of putting by a few pence among those not born to fortune.


A Dakota Land Boom

A Sure Way to Make Money—Buy Building Lot and Let Other People Work to Pay for Them

For the sake of illustrating the manner in which the material prosperity of the great west is being built up the Standard for once waives its objection to the insertion of free advertisements and reprints from a western contemporary, the following glowing invitation to achieve fortune by investing in Bismarck building lots, and leaving “Nature and circumstances to do the rest”:


The attention of capitalists and those seeking homes or opportunities for investments is invited to the capital of Dakota, where chances are now offered which come but once or twice in a lifetime. Persons are now living who saw Chicago when it had less than 500 inhabitants. They are now saying, “If I had only put a few hundred dollars in real estate there, I would have been a millionaire.” In the same way people bewall their lack of foresight regarding St. Paul and Minneapolis, Omaha, Kansas City, etc., etc. They forget that the same chances are now offered them, if they only have the wisdom to take advantage of the opportunity. Nature and circumstances have made Bismarck the site for the great city of Dakota. It is already the most important distributing point between St. Paul and the Pacific coast. The great cities of the country between New York and the west are situated from 400 to 500 miles distant from each other. New York to Buffalo, 425 miles; Cleveland, 585; Pittsburgh, 445; New York to Chicago, 913; Chicago to Kansas City, 440; Chicago to Omaha, 493; Chicago to St. Paul, 410; St. Paul to Bismarck, 169. The necessities of trade and commerce seem to require that great marts and distributing centers shall be located at equal distances across the continent.




It is the capitalist of the Great Empire of Dakota, the agricultural paradise of America. It is situated on the Great Transcontinental Railroad, the Northern Pacific, at the crossing of the Missouri River. It has the only bridge across the Missouri north of Omaha, a structure of steel, costing a million and a half dollars, and open to the world. It has the advantages of rail and water transportation,  the Missouri being navigable 1,200 miles above the city, and below it to the Gulf. It has regular lines of steamboats up and down the river, and the magnitude of the river trade is evidenced by the fact that here is situated one of the longest warehouses in the world. It has wood and native coal in abundance, the former to be purchased at $4 per cord and the latter at $3 per ton.

The Interstate commerce law operates to the great advantage of Bismarck,and will make it at once a very important wholesaling point. Freight can be brought here by boat and shipped north, west, and even east, at rates which must defy competition. The country around Bismarck is very fertile, adapted to almost any kind of agricultural production, and is rapidly settling. Farmers find a market here for their wheat at rates in advance of the general market prices, the local mills requiring it to fill contracts for flour with the west and with the various army posts up and down the river. Two new railroads will enter the city the present season, one of which, the Ordway and Bismarck, is already under contract. The Milwaukee and St. Paul will follow, and two others are under survey, and are likely to enter the city during the year. The society of Bismarck is unsurpassed, and its schools are excellent. Here is located the capital, with a building on which has already been expended $200,000. The North Dakota Penitentiary is also located here, and will be enlarged the present year. The Supreme Court meets here, as also the United States District Court. Under the law, all sessions of the legislature are held in Bismarck, and the offices of the Governor, Secretary of State, Auditor, Treasurer, Commissioner of Immigration, etc., etc., are located here.

Commercially, socially and geographically Bismarck possesses advantages unsurpassed by any town in the west. The return wave of prosperity is just striking it, and to keep the ball rolling the undersigned will quote property for thirty days at last fall's prices. It will not require a fortune to make an investment. Lots from $150 to $2,000—not in a suburb, but in town. Address,

It maybe interesting for thoughtful minds to consider what the enterprising young man often or twenty years hence is to do, when he goes to Bismarck and finds “Nature and circumstances” monopolized by those who were lucky enough to be born before him, and smart enough to take advantage of it.


Page 4

Mr. Parnell And The Phoenix Park Assassinations

There can be no doubt that in the letter it has printed as showing Mr. Parnell's condonation of the assassination of Cavendish and Burke the London Times has been deceived by a forgery of the same kind as that of the Morey latter which created so much excitement here toward the close of the Garfield-Hancock campaign. It has fallen readily into the trap because the notion that the Irish parliamentary leaders really sympathize with all Irish “outrages” is firmly rooted in the minds of the class of Englishmen which the Times represents. Yet for all its prejudices the Times is conducted on honorable principles, and will stultify its traditions if it does not do what it can to expose the forgery as soon as it shall be convinced that it has been imposed upon.

Mr. Parnell is not only too cautious a man to write such a letter, but there is nothing in his career that, outside of that class of Englishmen to whose anti-Irish prejudices nothing is incredible, would give color to the idea that he sympathized with assassination. And I have personal reasons for believing that, excluding the relatives of the murdered officials, there was no man in the three kingdoms more deeply shocked and horrified by these assassinations than Mr. Parnell. It so happened that it was through me that the first intelligence of these assassinations reached him under conditions in which only the most consummate actor could have concealed his real feelings.

I was at that time on the other side of the Atlantic as correspondent of the Irish World, and receiving a cable dispatch from Patrick Ford asking me tomeet Davitt immediately on his release, I went from Dublin to London, and in company with Mr. Sexton and some others of the Irish party met Davitt, who was escorted from Portland prison by Messrs. Parnell and Dillon, at the railway station. It was nearly 11 o'clock when I said good night to Mr. Davitt and the little party that had assembled t o greet him at the Westminster hotel and went to the house, of the friend in South Kensington with whom I was staying. It may seem strange to an American, hut though Cavendish and Burke had been then nearly three hours dead, and Dublin was convulsed with excitement, the general public of London, and even men so vitally interested as the Irish leaders, knew nothing of what had occurred. The London newspapers publish no Sunday editions. On Saturday nights their offices are deserted, and there is no machinery for getting out extras with unexpected news, no matter what its importance, and if telegrams had been sent to the Irish members they were probably delayed by the post office department. But early in the extremely early English summer morning, when the great city is sounder asleep than in any other part of the day, I was aroused by atelegraph messenger bringing me a private dispatch from Dr. Kelly,then of Rutland square, Dublin, but now of Lexington avenue, New York, apprising me of the tragedy. I immediately made what haste I could (for at that hour no public conveyance was to be had), to the Westminster hotel, and waking Davitt up, showed him the telegram. Springing up with intense emotion he at once sent for Messrs. Dillon and Parnell. All three, as well as other members of the Irish party who were subsequently sent for, were deeply pained and grieved at the news. Davitt seemed so  much “cut up” by it that I really felt for him, but the man who seemed stirred the most was Parnell—ordinarily the most undemonstrative of human beings—and on the first impulse he talked of immediately resigning and leaving public life forever. There could be no question of the real feelings of these men, and especially of Mr. Parnell. It is not that there was any personal sympathy with Burke, who had made himself thoroughly hated by patriotic Irishmen, but there was personal sympathy with Lord Cavendish, who had just arrived in Ireland and had done nothing to offend Irish sentiment. His appointment, moreover, to take the place of the justly hated Forster, accompanied as it was with the release of the Irish members from Kilmainham and of Davitt from Portland, was deemed the holding out of the olive branch by the Gladstone government—the dawn for Ireland of a better day. And to this the knives that flashed in Phoenix Park gave terrible, answer. At a single unexpected blow Parnell's plans were shattered. To him it was not merely two high official is who were stabbed to death in Phoenix Park, but a great policy and a high hope.

I had at that time good opportunities for judging of Irish feeling, and I feel confident that the unanimous expression of horror and regret which the Phoenix park assassinations provoked in Ireland, as well as from Irishmen in other parts of the world, was thoroughly genuine. Had these assassinations happened a week or two earlier; had it been Forster and Burke that were slain. instead of Cavendish and Burke, it would have been different: but to the Irish people these assassinations, happening, as they did, seemed like the slaughter of the bearer of a flag of truce—the slaying of the messenger of good tidings.

Had Mr. Gladstone been wise enough and strong enough to trust this feeling; had he refused to hold the Irish people responsible for what was not their act, and gone on in generous confidence with that policy of substituting conciliation or coercion, toward which he had made the first steps, years of bitterness might have been saved. But he was not wise enough or strong enough to resist the frantic English demand for repressive measures. The old, dreary round of coercion was entered upon again, and the sentiment of grief and abhorrence which had swept over Ireland with the news of the Phoenix park assassinations was quickly forgotten in intensified hatred of English oppression.

The Irish were right in using their strength to bring back the tories into power. No tory government could have gone to the same lengths in attempting to coerce Ireland as did Mr. Gladstone and his liberals. For to tory coercion there is the opposition of the English liberals, but to liberal coercion there was none—or, rather, there was but little, for to the honor of such men as Joseph Cowen and the little knot of English democrats, it should always be remembered that they stood as firmly against liberal coercion as against tory coercion. But the personal weight of Mr. Gladstone, the unquestioning confidence which he has inspired among the great body of British liberals, gave overwhelming support to any measure of coercion that he proposed.

Five years ago, when all the wonderful talents and peerless influence of the great English leader were being prostituted to trample down the rightful aspirations of the Irish people, it seemed to me that Mr. Gladstone had lived too long for his future fame, and that if his public career had closed in the victory that followed his magnificent Midlothian campaign his life would have gone down to posterity unsullied by a closing chapter such as that which tarnishes the fame of Burke. But through this chapter Mr. Gladstone has lived, and the good work he is now doing may blot out the memory of it. From the Irish point of view, Saul of Tarsus has become Paul the Apostle. The man who, a little while ago, was endeavoring to govern Ireland by Russian methods, and was sending Irish patriots to jail without trial, and even without specific accusation, is now leading the fight for Irish rights. And in this he is doing more than any other living man could have done, what is, of all things, most to he desired both for Great Britain and for Ireland—he is making a junction between the democracy of the two countries. That at last the great masses of Englishmen begin to see that the cause of Irish liberty is indeed their  cause; that at last patriotic Irish men begin to realize that their struggle is not in reality with the English people, but with a class dominance that oppresses both, is the greatest thing that could have happened for the future, of both Ireland and of Great Britain.

The moment the Irish political question is settled , if only temporarily, that moment the land question will flame up, not in Ireland alone, but in Great Britain as well. This is the bottom of the whole controversy, the objective point of the whole struggle. The long course of English misgovernment of Ireland which is now nearing its end in the triumph of the Irish people, has had for its object the maintenance of that system of slavery which, by making the land of a country the property of a class, enables that class to live in idleness at the expense of the producers of wealth. And the revolt of the Irish people is a social as well as a political revolt. It can stop short of nothing save the restitution of the land of Ireland to the whole Irish people—the recognition in a form adapted to modern civilization of the ancient Irish principle that assured to every citizen a foothold in his native land. Mere political independence will not satisfy Irish grievances. It can do nothing to eradicate poverty, to prevent starvation, to make life easier for the masses of the Irish people. But it will clear the way for the great measure that can accomplish all of these things. And in the struggle for this, Irishmen, Englishmen, Scotchmen and Welshmen will stand together.

Henry George


The Knights And Politics

The Journal of United Labor the official organ of the executive board of the Knights of Labor, in an article in its last number, entitled “Has It Come t o Stay?” recognizes the significance of recent local elections as showing the break-up of old political parties, and declares it to be evident that, properly organized and wisely led, the labor party will be irresistible; but adds that unless it strives toward the attainment of some living ideas its success can at best be but temporary. This is true. Yet the Journal seems hardly to realize how necessary it is that the ideas should give rise to the party rather than that the party should select the ideas, since it goes on to declare that “Knights of Labor need not go away from home to get issues to advocate. They have a declaration of principles, any one of which carried out would materially advance the welfare of the human family.” It then enumerates those sections of the Knights of Labor platform which demand: (1) the reservation of public land, for actual settlers and the taxing of lands held for speculative purposes; (2) a graduated income tax; (3) the doing away with banks of issue, and (4) state ownership of railroads, telegraphs and the like.

It would be well for the Knights of Labor in their assemblies to discuss these propositions with a view to political action, and we are glad to see the official journal thus directing attention to them. But the Knights of Labor cannot of themselves make a successful party, nor is it necessary that they should try, since any general measures that would promote their interests as citizens must also commend themselves to other citizens. The formative idea of the Knights of Labor is wider than that of simple trade unionism, in that it aims at uniting all classes of workers, and recognizes the importance of acting upon the general conditions of society. If the order has largely become a congeries of trades unions, sometimes at war with other trades unions, it is because this idea of acting upon general conditions has found no definite expression. But as soon as it does, then the action to curry it out must, of course, pass into the field of open political organization.

What the Knights of Labor, as all other workingmen, ought to set themselves to discover is what large measure of legislation they really need. Hitherto what strength of the order has not been devoted to mere trades unionism—to conferences, arbitrations, strikes and boycotts—has been frittered away in demands for such comparatively trivial measures of legislation as the doing away with convict competition, the establishment of bureaus of statistics, the inspection of factories, etc., etc., which, whether good or bad in themselves, can “go nowhere” to the settlement of the great labor question. What is needed to form a rallying point in politics is not a number of little propositions, but one great fundamental principle, so radical and inclusive in its nature that it will carry he little propositions with it or dispense with the need for them.

The change in general conditions which it is most important to the Knights of Labor and all other organized workingmen to bring about is that which will make the opportunities for employment abundant, and, consequently, wages high. This, also, is to the interest of unorganized labor; and even to that of the “rat” and the “scab.” And no matter how much the employer or the capitalist, driven, as is generally the case, by as keen a competition as exists among workingmen, may in his individual dealings desire to lower wages, yet he too wants general conditions in which there shall be abundant opportunity for employment and high wages, for these mean “good times,” with business brisk and profitable.

Thus, when it comes to affecting general conditions through political action, the larger interests of all producers—of all who by any exertion of muscle or brain take part in the complex processes by which the wants of society are satisfied—become identical; and there is no reason why those who aim at carrying certain measures should not welcome to their side, without other distinction, all who are in favor of those measures. This, moreover, is the condition of success.

The root of all labor troubles, the cause of that. intense competition for employment which tends to sink wages to the point of a bare living, and of the banding of men together to resist it, is plainly the difficulty that those who have nothing but their labor to sell land in getting employment for it. As is shown more elaborately in a chapter from “Social Problems,” reprinted in another column, the cause of this difficulty of finding employment lies in the monopolization of land—the natural means and indispensable condition for the employment of labor.

Of this the masses throughout the United States are widely conscious, and are becoming every day more conscious, and it is already clear that the land question will be the next real political issue. That the Journal sees this is evident from the prominence which it gives it in its suggestion of “issues.”

But the land plank of the Knights of Labor platform is inadequate. It represents the first vague perception that the ills of which labor is conscious are to be found in our treatment of land, rather than any definite idea of how land is to be opened to labor. It leads:

That the public lands, the heritage of the people, be reserved for actual settlers—not another acre for railroads or speculators; and that all lands now held for speculative purposes be taxed to their full value.

Considering that our public domain is all but gone, the first part of this plank proposes what would be only a locking of the stable door after the horse had been stolen, even if all experience did not show that it is in practice impossible to prevent speculators from getting possession of land so long as they find great profits in it. The second part is of more importance. To tax lands held for speculation even as heavily as lands in use, would at present throw open considerable quantities of land. But it would not prevent speculation, since speculators could in many cases pay that tax and still profit by the enormous increase in land values, which comes with rapidly increasing population.

And even if it be intended to tax land held for speculative purposes up to its full value, so as to prevent the holding of land unused, this could not he a final settlement of the question nor a restoration to the people of their heritage. It would still leave to individuals and corporations the enormous incomes drawn from land which is not hold for speculation, but put to use. And as population increased and land values augmented, while more and more land was held for other than speculative purposes, labor would find itself in as bad a condition as ever. There is in Ireland, for example, little or no land held for speculative; purposes. Moreover, there is an indefiniteness about such a proposition that would prevent any law based on it from being carried out. How is it lo be determined whether land is being held for speculative purposes or not? Any pretense of use or occupancy—a few cattle, a little scratching of soil, a bit of a shanty—would be sufficient to give excuse for evasion.

The only way to really prevent speculation in land is to tax land values, irrespective of improvements, and to tax them so heavily as to take the full rental value for public use. In this way not only would speculation in land be made unprofitable, but the enormous values which the growth of society gives to land held for other than speculative purposes could be taken for the use of the whole people. And the fight might as well be made from the beginning upon this proposition as upon anything which merely squints at it. If to do so would be to excite more opposition, so also would it be to arouse stronger support.

No one understands all this better than the keen and progressive minds in the ranks of the knights themselves.

It is in the assemblies of the Knights of Labor and in the Central labor unions that workingmen have found opportunities for the discussion of social questions and the necessary foundation for beginning political action, as the working farmers are beginning to find in their wheels, granges and alliances. But as we said last week, the impulse as it spreads must bring into cohesion men of all vocations, and weld them into a party which will probably take for itself some name less subject to narrow interpretations than that of labor party—a party which it is already clear will have for its definite purpose the assurance to all the people of their natural and equal rights.

In the meantime we are glad to see the organ of the knights urging the discussion of principles, which is, after all, the great means of promoting intelligent political action.


The Lesson Of The Elevated Roads

The history, printed in another column, of the marvelous development of land values in Harlem under the stimulus of the present imperfect rapid transit system, is one which well illustrates the manner in which, under existing social conditions,  every improved process of production tends to the exclusive enrichment of a single privileged class. Magnificent as has been the spoil which the elevated roads have garnered for their promoters and stockholders, it falls short by scores of millions of dollars of the immense wealth which the silent inexorable working of economic law has poured into the laps of the fortunate owners of Harlem lands. The poor man's village has been transformed into the rich man's suburb; the lofty flat house has replaced the modest cottage; the rental of $12 a month has swelled to one of $1,500 a year; a limited number of speculators have become millionaires, and the men of mode rate means, who fondly dreamed that rapid transit would open up to them a region of comfortable low priced homes, have had a rude awakening.

So will it ever be as long as men consent to surrender to a favored few the privilege of monopoly in land. Let a road be constructed tomorrow which shall whirl its passengers to the upper end of Westchester county within thirty minutes, and the chief effect would be seen in a portentous rise in Westchester building lots. Let anew industry be introduced, employing  thousands of laborers and clerks, and within a limited time rents would be higher and wages as low as ever. For the one thing in which absolute monopoly is possible is land, and the man who can forbid his fellows to work or live upon the special spot where alone working and living are possible to them, can and will extract from them the uttermost far thing that they can pay and still continue to live and work.

That was a strange spectacle, the fining of forty-odd business men at the bar of a criminal court in this city for selling oleomargarine, which is pronounced by leading chemists to be healthy food. This was the culmination of a long conflict between two classes of tradesmen, butter dealers and oleomargarine dealers. A law prohibiting the coloring of oleomargarine so as to resemble butter was procured by the butter dealers. In some states they required it to be colored pink and in others green. How effective to destroy the oleomargarine trade such laws must be any one can realize by imagining the butter dish on his table to contain a pink, green or white substance. The New York law was contested and sustained, with the result of bringing to the criminal bar a large number of men whose offense was that their manufacture was a competitor of factory butter, and to destroy great values invested in oleomargarine establishments. Oleomargarine cannot compete with good dairy butter. It is an inferior article. But it can and did compete with factory butter, some of the grades of which are not only inferior to oleomargarine, but positively unhealthy; hence the laws against it. It is noticeable that none of the persistent sticklers for “vested interests” have anything to say for “vested interests” in the oleomargarine business which have been so ruthlessly destroyed. It makes a great difference, it seems, whether “vested interests” are in a legitimate business or a monopoly.

There was more than he intended in Assemblyman Crosby's objection to the labor holiday bill that labor ought; to have no holiday until it is free. With the bigotry and ignorance that characterize his class, he intended to sneer at labor organizations, which, in imitation of stock exchanges, medical societies, lawyer's trade unions, and so on, undertake to regulate the supply and price of labor by association; but his words apply with greater force a thousand fold to the power over labor of his own class. By the appreciation of land values to their own use a portion of the community holds the rest in bondage, since man without land is as helpless as a fish in the air. So long as that condition continues labor cannot be free, and, if the Crosbys are to have their way, never will be.

Readers of recent articles in the Standard relative to business men will see that the labor question is of interest to them as well as to the class denominated workingmen. The labor question is a question of wages and interest against rent, of work against monopoly. The income of the average business man is in part wages and in part interest. In the matter of wages he is interested equally with the man he hires; in the matter of interest he is still further interested, for interest falls as wages do. As with the man he hires, rent is his enemy, not only to the extent of the rent he pays, but to the extent that increasing rent diminishes opportunities for business and restricts the purchasing power of his customers. Every business man will recognize this truth , that the business man who has not some special advantage over business men in general is in a bad way. He is all the time under the harrow, and liable at any time to descend from employer to employee, as so many have before him. What does he propose to do about it?

The story of life in Dakota, as given in the columns of the Standard this week, sheds a strong light upon the processes of wealth-getting in vogue in our western empire. There, as here, fortune comes to him who has the wit and foresight to seize upon the natural sources of production, and hold them until a gathering population shall compete for the privilege of using them.

A Rev. Dr. Stuffens telegraphs from Rome to the Catholic News that the pope has decided not to abolish the Knights of Labor; but that “if the Knights identify themselves with theories now being disseminated by certain agitators this decision in their favor will be revoked”—probably by the Rev. Dr. Stiffins.

The New York Tribune is approving the theory of evolution by developing a rudimentary mind under the influence of the environment. In a half sensible kind of a way the Tribune is actually beginning to think.

“Land is high,” remarks the Tribune, speaking of this city,” and the tendency is to make it higher.” And then the thought process begins. The Tribune sees a vast multitude of citizens eager for the privilege of using land; it sees a limited number of persons preventing them from doing so; it sees land values soaring skyward; and combining these inductions into a theory or argument it delivers itself of the opinion that if land owners aren't pretty careful they will make New Yorkers tired of trying to live in New York and thus cause land values to take a drop again for want of competition. Here is what it says:

If this market is to be sustained, more respect must be paid by landlords to the fact that not every resident of New York is a millionaire. The number of persons who can afford to pay rentals of over $1,200 is comparatively small.. . . Unless something is done to provide homes for tenants who can pay from $600 to $1,000 rent within an hour's reach of their place of business, the real estate market, in the opinion of prudent and observant men, is likely to take a precipitate fall that will be very injurious to New York. The date of this misfortune is being hurried by labor troubles. These have recently been so  general that builders are becoming discouraged, and they  burden the situation with a problem that does not admit a ready solution. . . . So much depends. in n business sense, upon keeping the real estate market firm, moderate and active that every taxpayer should feel akeen interest in averting the dangers to it that arise from foolish speculation and in supporting all those municipal improvements likely to strengthen it.

As the Tribune's rudimentary mind develops into a true thinking apparatus it will discover that the reason for the progression of a horse and cart is not because of the cart pushing the horse. Simultaneously it will learn that builders are not discouraged because of labor troubles, but that labor troubles arise because building and other productive operations are discouraged. As the process of evolution advances. and its power of observing and co-ordinating phenomena increases, it will observe that builders can't build without land to build on. and that the reason they can't get land to build on is because of that very “firmness” of the real estate market that it is so anxious to see maintained. And then it will begin to ask indignantly by what right a few individuals presume to deprive their fellow men of that equal right of access to the raw material of nature without which capital and labor are as powerless as a lever without a fulcrum.

The Mail and Express lately quoted with approval a suggestion by Dr. L. L. Seaman, a gentleman who has devoted much time and thought to penal questions, “that the male convicts in the penitentiary should be brought over to New York in gangs and set to work on city improvements. “Why,” says Dr. Seaman, “should not the gangs of brawny stonecutters and metal workers, who deplete the public treasury with their sterile to it on the Island, take in hand the construction of the great system of docks and quays which one day is to engirdle the entire water front of the city? Is there nothing to engage the latent energies of these costly excrescences of our civilization in the projected opening of  the Harlem river as the great commercial enterprise of the future? There are quarries of building stone all about us waiting for the drill and blast and tool man. Absolutely cut loose from the octopus of political maladministration, what hinders the gradual development of a water front under the regulated labor of convicts, which shall. Provide for the inflowing commerce of both hemispheres?”

What, indeed? There is, as Dr. Seaman says, no kick of the natural elements of production in and a round this city, and no lack of demand for the completed products. There are not only quarries of building stone “waiting for the drill and blast and tool man,” and a vast river front lacking development, but there are also a few building lots (say one half the total area of the city, or thereabouts) waiting for the stone and other materials to be used of them. There is not only a mighty commerce demanding an improved water front, but also a mighty population demanding houses to live in. There are rapid transit roads to be built, bridges to be erected, gas mains and electric wires to be laid and dozens of things to be done. Why should not our convicts be “cut loose from the octopus of political maladministration,” and set to work at all this? The sure way to get work would then be to become a convict; workingmen would compete among themselves for the privilege of conviction; and the souls of the Mail and Express and Dr. Seaman would be glad within them by an unmistakable improvement in the character, conduct and conversation of the convict class, which would be a great blessing and an irrefutable evidence of the superiority of the system.

Of course there is an alternative. Matters might he so arranged that men should have the privilege of going to work at the stone quarries and the water front and the vacant lots and all the rest of it, without going through the primal formality of conviction. But neither the Mail and Express nor Dr. Seaman are at all likely to accept this alternative, for the simple reason that along with the decrease in the number of convicts there would come a decrease in the incomes of not many “Christian” churches and of a great many of our best families.


Archbishop Corrigan ls rapidly growing worse. The priests of the diocese are being bulldozed to sign an amended exculpation of “His Grace,” and a number of German monks have been inveigled and coerced into signing another similar paper in English, a language which to most of them is as a foreign tongue.

We print these documents in another column, where will also he found a threatening letter addressed by the archbishop to the editor and the proprietor of the Catholic Herald, in which they are warned of peril from his ecclesiastical thunders if they continue to criticize his course. No wonder that “His Grace” was emphatic even to underscoring that his threat should be considered private and not to be published. Only one thing is wanting to make the archiepiscopal epistle per feet in its way, and that is a postscript—BURN THIS LETTER.

Since the editor of the Catholic Examiner has been temerarious enough to say in his last issue that we have too many popes in this country, surely some too too unutterably awful thing must speedily happen to him.

The attention of our friends is called to the list of land and labor tracts printed in our advertising columns. They put within the reach of all an efficient means of attracting attention to the greatest of reforms.


Men And Women

Elder F. W. Evans of the Shaker settlement at New Lebanon. N. Y., is a staunch advocate of the common rights to land. He says that the claim to property in land is a “doctrine of devils; upon it Babylon stands.” He quotes Jefferson: “land belongs to man only in usufruct;” and says that “when this primal truth shall be universally recognized, the whole landed system of the world shall be obsolete.”

Rev. Charles P. McCarthy of this city visited Mauch Chunk, Pa. at the close of last week and made several stirring speeches in behalf of appropriating land values for public purposes. One meeting was open to the general public, another was restricted to Knights of Labor, another to miners, each of which meetings was largely attended and a lively interest was awakened in the land question.

James J. Fay of Rutland. Vt., an enthusiastic advocate of the principle of “the land for the people,” and for some time master workmen of the Knights of Labor has been elected president of his village against a candidate receiving; the combined support of the republican and democratic machines.


A Utterance of Cardinal Gibbons

In the full report of Cardinal Gibbons report to the holy see on the subject of the Knights of Labor appears a paragraph not  hitherto published in any English translation of the report. Speaking of the injury likely to be inflicted on the church by a determination to array her forces in opposition to popular rights, the cardinal refers for illustration to the ease of Dr. McGlynn, and says:

“We have lately seen the sorrowful and I menacing confusion which was caused by the condemnation inflicted, for the maintenance of discipline, by an archbishop upon a single priest; a condemnation which the archbishop I believed to be just and necessary, but which struck a priest who was regarded as a friend of the people. Now, if the consequences to the interests of the church from the condemnation of a single priest were so deplorable because that priest was regarded as the friend of the people, what will not be the consequences to fear from a condemnation which shall strike directly at the people themselves in the exercise of what they be have to be their legitimate rights?”


What Happened at a Meeting of the Republican County Committee

Daily Paper.

Grimes— What did you say?

Redmond—Didn't you hear me?

Grimes—Who's a liar?

Redmond—You are.

Grimes—You are a liar!

Redmond—You are a liar!

Grimes (raising his fists)—Ah!

Redmond (raising his fists)— Let's see you!

Grimes—Don't you call me a liar!

Redmond—Don't you ca1l me a liar!

Grimes—Now, Redmond.

Redmond—Grimes, what's the matter with

you anyhow?

Grimes—That's all right.

Redmond—All right.

Several members of the Union league, who

were looking on expecting a knock-out, were



A New Labor Paper

Mr. J. N. Bogert, an indefatigable gatherer of local labor news, has began the publication of the Local, a weekly newspaper which is intended to give the local news of the labor movement. in New York. The columns of the opening number teem with pleasant chit-chat about people and events. Mr. Bogert has a lange acquaintance with the wage workers or New York, and is well qualified to carry his venture to a success.


Page 5


The Week

The scheme for an elevated railway in Broadway has fallen a through, and some other system of rapid transit, probably of the arcade type, will have the preference. It is a fact worth nothing that in considering this question the legislature has simply endeavored to learn what would best suit the real estate owners of Broadway and other streets along which the proposed lines are to run, and has ignored the interests of the immense landless class of citizens, for whose benefit streets are supposed to be maintained and rapid transit systems organized.

The New York state senate has finally passed he bill requiring savings banks to publish he names of depositors who have had $10 or more to their credit for twenty years, but haven't in the meantime been heard from. The benefits which will accrue from such a law are too evident to require demonstration. The opponents of the measure have contented themselves with uttering a few generalities about inquisitorial legislation, and the hardships that might be inflicted on the many people who are trying to save money without the knowledge of dissolute relatives by making deposits at intervals of twenty-one fears. The real reason for the opposition to the bill was that it would diminish the profits of the stockholders in savings banks by forcing them to surrender a lot of money that doesn't belong to them.

Mr. Beekman, the president of the board of aldermen, has been considering the tenement house problem. “It is an open secret,” says Mr. Beekman, “that tenements and rookeries have been erected in port ions of the city which should have been kept exempt from buildings. In these houses people swarm like ants. The air is fetid, noxious, and the death rate is enormous. The children grow up weak and sickly, making puny men and women. It is proposed to tear down these rookeries, map put a fair area of land in those portions of the city most densely crowded, and construct small parks. These miniature parks shall each have fountains, and be veritable playgrounds for the young. Now the little ones have no place in which to play, nor their parents a spot where they can enjoy a refreshing breathing spell.” And with this humane purpose in view Mr. Beekman asks the legislature to appoint a board for the laying out of parks with authority to spend one million of dollars yearly.

Mr. Beekman means well, but he doesn't quite grasp all the elements of the problem he is trying to solve. People don't crowd in tenement houses by choice; they do it because poverty compels them to; and the tenement houses are built in “parts of the city which should have been exempt from buildings,” because landlords can make most money by putting them there. If Mr. Beekman really grants to give the tenement house dwellers the benefit of a park let him spend a million a fear in destroying the beauty of Central park—choke up its lakes, deface its statuary, put down its trees, ruin its drainage, withdraw its policemen—make its neighborhood generally distasteful to the “better classes,” and he will be gratified by seeing tenement houses rise in its vicinity by scores. As for his proposed new parks, their only effect will be to raise nearby rents; and the prettier they are the higher the rents will rise. That Mr. Beekman sees this in a confused, puzzle-headed way is evident from his proposal that his new board shall have the power of “adjudging what proportion of the expenses incurred shall be assessed upon property holders who may be directly benefited by the erection of such parks.”

Many months ago the legislature of this state enacted that after a certain date no more telegraph poles should be erected in this pity, and appointed a subway commission to fee that. the existing wires were taken down and properly buried. The wires haven't been buried yet to any extent, but the subway commission lives and draws its salary, asserting its usefulness by giving permits for the erection of “temporary” poles and the stringing of new wires thereon. There is a deal of difference between making a law and enforcing it.

The Woodlawn cemetery company bought 100 acres of land in Westchester county from various parties for about $150,000, and under the laws of New York has held its property free from even the moderate taxation imposed on other landowners. The company Bas sold the fee simple of fifty acres for $1,150,000, has received $l,162,023 for burial lots, and remains possessed of land now valued at something like $20,000,000. These facts appear from a report of the cemetery company, made in obedience to a senate resolution, comment is scarcely necessity.

The legislature of Illinois is still groping in economic darkness. Not content with endeavoring to change the nature of a rack-renting foreign born landlord by the simple process of forcing him to become an American Citizen, it is now trying to minimize the freed for wealth by limiting the amount which any person may lake by descent or will. Fifteen hundred acres of land, or $500,000 in money, to a surviving wife, husband, child or corporation is to be the limit of bequest hereafter, and the state is to be the universal residuary legatee.

The value of special legislation. of this sort is not to be measured by its unwisdom. It shows, at least. that the people. of Illinois are aware of something wrong in their social system.

A good deal of platitude is being printed about the unfortunate Boston women who allowed themselves to be persuaded into depositing their money with Mrs. Howe, “the woman banker,” by promises of interest at the rate of ninety or one hundred per cent. Comparisons are made between Mrs. Howe and Mr. Ferdinand Ward; and the moral pointed in both cases is that the desire for wealth has somehow a stultifying influence, making its victims blind to obvious facts and inferences, any sane man or woman, it is said, might have known that neither Ferdinand Ward nor Mrs. Howe could honestly earn the extravagant profits they promised; ergo, to invest money with either of them showed a species of insanity on the part of the investor.

This is a kind of argument that, starting from correct promises, reaches a false and illogical conclusion. The business men who trusted their money with Ward were sane enough and shrewd enough. Their only mistake was that they assumed Ward to be one feud of a swindler instead of another. They imagined him to have special facilities for cheating the United States government, and invested their money on the faith that he would exercise them; whereas the only facilities Ward possessed were facilities for making his dupes believe that he was going to steal for their benefit. It is just barely possible that Mrs. Howe's victims were not essentially fools, but only unlucky people who applied perfectly trustworthy business principles to a case which those principles accidentally failed to fit.

With the laudable object of giving the working people of this country more to do, our legislators long since decided that whereas a man by making a pair of shoes could earn enough to buy a yard of cloth, he should thereafter be compelled to make two pairs, the labor on one pair going to pay for the cloth, and that on the other to support the various contractors, agents, high officials and other nonproducers, without whom the best government on earth would dissolve into anarchy. Incidentally it was provided that if the cloth were made here, then the labor on the extra pair of shoes should not be devoted to the support of the contractors, etc., but should be appropriated by the men who hired the men, women and children who made the cloth. This system, humorously called “protection to American labor,” has been in operation for a good many years, with the gratifying result of making American citizens perform an immense number of extra days' work, under penalty of having no cloth to cover themselves withal.

But the system has received a shock; not a death blow by any means, but a shock. A cunning detective, sent abroad by the authorities to look into things in general, reports that the unprincipled foreigners who hire the pauper labor of Eu rope to make cloth for them a r e actually descending to the meanness of lying, and backing up their lies with false oaths. They are sending cloth here that should properly sell for the labor on four pairs of shoes, and telling a confiding United States government that it's only worth the labor on two pairs. So says Special Treasury Agent L. M. Montgomery in a recent report from Aix-la-Chapelle, in Germany. And the consequences are direful. The American workingman is getting his cloth without doing quite a s many day 's work for it as he ought to do. The men who hire American men, women and children to make cloth for them are not getting quite as much for the cloth as they would like to, and the contractors and other governmental necessities a r e loft a little, just a very little, short. Altogether a very sad condition of affairs.

Really it is astonishing how ready men are to lie when they can make money by it—in Europe.

On Saturday last eight English women arrived at Boston from England under contract to work in a Providence mill. The collector made a pretense of enforcing the law against the importation of contract labor, but finally allowed the women to land, the employer explaining that they were skilled in a special kind of work which nobody in this country could do.

Protection for people who live by other people's work is one thing, and protection for people who live by working themselves is quite another. It would be rather difficult to import a case of fabrics duty free on the ground that they were better made and finished than domestic goods.

Years and years ago a Mexican official, probably now dead, gone and forgotten, wrote his mime and stuck some wax on a piece of paper or parchment certifying that thereafter, as long as grass should grow and water run, Charles Beaubien and Guadaloupe Miranda, their heirs or assigns, should have dominion over 2,680 square miles of territory, with full authority to say who should live and work there, and on what terms they should enjoy those privileges. And on Monday last the supreme court of the United States decided that the names being properly written, the wax duly stamped and all other accessories in order, the assignees of Beaubien and Miranda, to wit: The Maxwell land grant company, the Denver and Rio Grande railway company, the Pueblo and Arkansas Valley railroad company and the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe company shall have dominion accordingly, with the right to levy such taxes as they please or. the inhabitants of those parts of Colorado and New Mexico comprised within the limits of the 2,680 square miles aforesaid.

Go west, young man, go west!

Those wicked Irish members are making lots of trouble for the British house of commons, and latterly they have developed a remarkable faculty of turning to account the very means hitherto deemed most efficacious for their suppression. A certain Colonel Saunderson having remarked in the course of debate that the home rule Irish members had associated themselves with murderers, and declining to withdraw the statement. Mr. Healy explicitly denounced him as a liar, whereon Mr. Healy was “named” by the speaker and put out. The colonel started anew with his speech, when another Irishman—Mr.  Sexton this time—arose and stated his opinion that the colonel was a liar, emphasizing the assertion with a promise to thrash the colonel “when he caught him outside.” It was evident that every member of the Irish party intended to follow suit; and sooner than be called a liar eighty odd times in succession, with a looming possibility of receiving eighty odd separate thrashings in the near future, the gallant colonel confessed his falsehood by withdrawing the offensive observation.

But parliament will pass the coercion bill all the same.

Briefly stated, the Irish coercion bill is an enactment that any Irishman who fails to pay his rent promptly, or otherwise displeases his landlord or his landlord's agent, shall be sentenced to imprisonment at hard labor for six months. And this sentence is to be imposed, not after due trial and proving of the facts before a jury, but at the discretion of a magistrate, generally a landlord himself and always a sympathizer with landlords. The outburst of indignation with which the action of the British government has been greeted in this country is creditable to human nature, and shows that American citizens, of whatever descent., have, at bottom, a deep seated hatred of tyranny and injustice. Whether it is altogether consistent or not is another question, and a question worth considering. Right here in New York city there are tens of thousands of tenants, rack-rented to the limits of human endurance, and beyond it. Suppose that these tenants, organizing together, should unanimously refuse to paytheir rents.  Suppose that they should resist dispossess warrants by barricading their doors, by pulling down staircases, by hustling and impeding the officers of. the law; suppose that they should boycott every man or woman who consented to pay any rent, refusing to speak with them, to work for them, to buy from them, to ride with them in public conveyances, to have anything whatever to do with them; suppose that the clergy of New York should support them in this sort of conduct. Would the Kellys and Havertys and Cockrans be found ranged on their side, applauding them, addressing meetings on their behalf, providing funds for their support? Would the press of the country be, unanimous in approval? If they would, all right, and the sooner the rack-rented tenants of America open the ball tho better. But on the whole, we incline to think that the only result of such a movement would be an overcrowding of the penitentiary and workhouses and a series of newspaper editorials denouncing anarchical ideas and counseling the tenants to move on a couple of thousand miles or so—there's plenty of room for them out west.

After all, there is a great deal of human nature in humanity. We all have a keen perception of the mote in the eye of Russia; the American appreciates the horrible evils of English landlordism in Ireland, and the Eng- Hslunan is not slow to retort on us with a tu quoque; it's the next house that is cursed with malaria and mosquitoes; and to say that anything is wrong right here and now is a crime against civilization. All things considered, the rack-rented tenantry of New York had better wait awhile.


Should the Labor Party Exist?

The literary society of the Young Men's Christian association will meet the Lyceum society of Philadelphia in Association hall, corner of Fourth avenue and Twenty-third street, on Tuesday evening, April 26, to debate the question as to whether “the existence of a distinctive labor party be of benefit to the country?” Supreme Court Justice John R. Brady will decide the debate. The discussion is expected to be spirited.


The Week In Wall Street

Slight as it was t h e $375,000 increase in reserve last week showed that the long expected return of money to eastern financial centers is about to set in. The actual increase in currency was $2,000,000, but the perceptible decrease in specie, resulting from the heavy customs requirements, brought the net increase down to $375,000. With increased funds, on which to speculate, and the lower interest rates consequent, may be expected greater activity in the market and probable higher prices. This case in the monetary situation, the still favorable reports of railroad earnings and the efforts of large holders to keep the upward ball in motion are the principal reasons given by the commission houses for their advice to customers to purchase with every drop of a point or two.

The upward tendency has met and will continue to meet with set backs, as, with every advance, the cliques will sell large blocks of stocks. Heading has been the leader in the market and has advanced several points on the report of a combination of the Pennsylvania, the Lehigh Valley. the Reading and Jersey Central. These four roads are together powerful enough to control the anthracite coal trade of the country, and thus to increase their incomes from this traffic. President Corbin of the Reading has estimated that one dollar per ton can be saved in marketing anthracite. This, en 34,000,000 tons, is a tremendous item, and when to this decrease in the cost of mining and marketing coal is added the increase of fifty cents per ton to the consumer we begin to understand why all the coal stocks have been strong at advances, and why Reading, the largest coal road in the country, is the strongest of all. Then, again, the close alliance or rather the identity of control, between Reading and Jersey Central Is said to have thrown in the hands of the former the control of the river front on the Jersey shore. Mr. Corbin is pursuing a pence policy with the Pennsylvania company, the result of which is that Mr. Garrett of the Baltimore and Ohio says that he is not going to depend on these roads for an entrance into New York, but that, if necessary, he will build a line across New Jersey and find an entrance of his own. This effectually disposes of the great Baltimore and Ohio deal that was agitating the street a few weeks ago, and puts Mr. Garrett where he was previous to the reported combination with Richmond Terminal and Reading. This new-born harmony between the Pennsylvania and Reading will lead to greater economy in the operation of both roads. Mr. Corbin is a stickler for economy, and great changes in management always follow his election to the presidency of a railroad. Instead of starting their passenger trains from the same cities at the same time and running a neck and neck race to their destination the Pennsylvania and the Reading trains are to alternate and divide the traffic. This will serve to reduce the number of passenger trains on each road without lessening the income of either. The Reading has notified the lessees of its collieries that they can load in Pennsylvania ears for shipment over the Pennsylvania lines. This permission is a practical annulment of the clause in these leases requiring all shipments to be made ever the Reading road.

The interstate commerce law has given strength to both Pacific Mail and Canadian Pacific stocks. It was supposed that the fourth section would throw a heavy traffic of Pacific coast products over these outside routes, but the wool growers of California and producers and business men of that section generally are clamoring for its temporary suspension, and as this suspension has been granted in favor of some of the southern roads the street is unable to say how and what stocks will be affected. The Ohio wool growers object to any modification or suspension of the clause, they finding in the law as much of a bonanza almost as a prohibitory wool tariff law would give them.

Should the commission hold the transcontinental roads to its requirements the earnings of the outside lines would increase and their stock would advance; but should it determine to temporarily suspend its operation in favor of these roads, their stocks would advance while the others would decline. Again, a railroad whose traffic is injured by the law may petition the court for a receiver, and  while in bankruptcy it will thus earn more money than if kept out of the hands of the court. It has long been suspected that some of our federal judges are owned, body and soul, by the corporations, and it is  a very, very easy thing to change a president or general manager of a railroad into a receiver and in this way allow the road to defy the law. Beyond this is a suspicion that the tariff arrangement previously carried on by the different pools, at the expense of the railroads, can now be made just as well by the commission at the expense of the government. Whichever way it may turn the railroads are likely to come out ahead. The clauses which favor their interests they will be likely to en force, and those that are against they will make so obnoxious to the traveling and shipping public that the people will ask for their repeal. At any rate, they can follow their old tactics in many instances until complaint is made by the persons aggrieved. The country may discover that the regulation of the tariff of 140,000 miles of railroad is too big a job for a commission to undertake. But the law is a step in the right direction, and may lead to the people later on to assume full control.

The struggle for the control of Broadway has shown that a majority of the property owners are opposed to an elevated road, and that a great portion of this opposition can be enlisted in favor of the arcade scheme as being the lesser of two evils, one of which they feel certain they are bound to endure. Manhattan elevated stock has been in demand because it is believed the new rapid transit system will eventually come under the control of Gould and Field.

The Montague street (Brooklyn) cable company are to pay $10,000 a year to Mr. Pierrepont for the privilege of passing over about two blocks of that .street. This is a glaring instance of a tax on capital, levied for the benefit of a private person. Mr. Pierrepont loses nothing, his property is not injured, nor does he contribute anything in exchange for this tremendous tax, not the company must pay him every year the equivalent of 200,000 fares for his consent to puss through a street that has been used for twenty years as a public high way.

Reports of fortunes being made in western land speculation still come in. Kansas City business sites are selling for $6,000 a front foot, while the real estate boomer seems to be at work in every town and city from the Mississippi to the Pacific coast. The New York Daily Commercial Bulletin, a paper devoted to trade interests, gives, in a recent edition, a scathing rebuke to these land speculators, and blames them for disturbing the distribution of wealth and crippling trade by raising the price of land so high that business cannot be transacted profitably.

The grocery and dry goods trades are reported dull, whileiron production is very unsteady. The iron men seem to think the interstate commerce act is the cause, and not the increased price of coal on one hand and a decreased demand resulting from land speculation on the other.

Government bonds, though rather dull, are very firm, and with renewed activity will go higher. Already printed interviews with prominent legislators show that the proposition to have the government; buy its own bonds in open market is receiving that attention that only organized effort can procure.

X. Y. Z.


Dr. McGlynn

Thoughtful Catholics Steadily Rallying To His Support

A Diamond-Studded Chalice for Dr. Curran—The Brooklyn Meeting—St. Stephen's Parishioners Will Stand by the Soggarth Aroon

Among the event of the week marking the drift of public opinion on the persecution of the priestly sympathizers with Dr. McGlynn was the presentation to Dr. Curran, by the teachers and ex-teacher of St. Stephen's church, of a beautiful golden chalice, set with rubies and diamonds. The presentation took place at the house of Miss Byrne, (J0o Second avenue, Mr. James O'Reilly accompanying the gift with a brief address.

Dr. Curran, in his response, reaffirmed his opinion that Dr. McGlynn had made no mistake in his theology, and insisted that he himself had been guilty of no contumacy in supporting him. He took his stand by Dr. McGlynn, knowing full well that he would never wrongfully oppose any proper authority. “Dr. McGlynn,” said Dr. Curran, “is suffering now, but the time will come when he will be more sanctified than ever.”


The Brooklyn Meeting

Repudiating Any Action Which Looks to Interference in Politics

Thursday, April 14.—Odd Fellows' hall, Brooklyn, was packed by the Catholic men and women who sympathized with Dr. McGlynn in the outrage which had been perpetrated upon him by the archbishop of New York and the castle Catholic end of the priesthood of his diocese. Among those present were: John J. Clancy, ex-member of the board of education; John J. Rafferty, S. P. Ellsworth, P. F. Delaney, John McMackin of this city; James Riordan, Michael J. Kelly, George Smith, George McVey, secretary of the workingmen's state assembly; Richard F. Caffrey, John J. Bealin, James P. Archibald, Richard Hourigan, Thomas S. Delaney, Patrick Fagan, Thomas P. Gill, James J. Gahan, M. O'Connell and Bernard McQuade. The temper of the meeting was unmistakable, as will be seen by the following resolutions, which were adopted with a cheer that almost shook off the roof of the building:

“Resolved, In mass meeting assembled, that we uphold the land doctrine of the party of united labor, and insist that its introduction into the laws of our country will do more to abolish poverty and its favorite child, vice, from our land than any of the alleged principles that are now being urged by the office seeking politicians and political paupers and thieves of the two old parties.

“Resolved, That we affirm, not only the entire morality of the doctrine, but also its absolute antagonism to immorality and vice.

“Resolved, That we deny emphatically the right of any foreign tribunal in church or state to interfere directly or indirectly with the politics of this country.

“Resolved, That we approve of the manner in which the parishioners of St. Stephen's church have expressed their opposition to, and condemnation of, the action of the archbishop of New York by refusing to contribute out of their hard earnings money to the support of men who are, perhaps thoughtlessly or ignorantly, opposed to a man who has done more to elevate and improve the condition of his fellow men than the archbishop and all his friends will ever be able to do unless they recant their errors, and undo the evil they have done.

“Resolved, That we urge the consideration of the plan adopted by the parishioners of St. Stephen's upon the attention of the parishioners of all the churches of the diocese of New York, to the end that the men now in authority may be forced, through their pockets, to give that thought to the needs of the toilers and producers which they have heretofore shamelessly neglected to do.

“Resolved, That we uphold and endorse the action of Dr. McGlynn and tender him our thanks, our affection, our love, for his courageous action in proving true to his convictions in the face of vindictive opposition from the wealthy and powerful.

“Resolved, That the chairman of this meeting be directed to appoint a committee of the citizens of this district to' wait upon the bishop of the city of Brooklyn and the archbishop of New York to explain the land doctrines to those gentlemen and request them to think on the subject prayerfully, to the end that when they have arrived at a knowledge of the truth, Rev. Dr. McGlynn may be honorably reinstated in his position as the pastor of St Stephens.”

James P. Archibald began with a glowing panegyric to Dr. McGlynn, and in the course of his address fired ringing shots at “the O'Donoghue,” “Bully” Donnelly, “Tammany” Preston and Archbishop Corrigan. He said in conclusion that if the Lord did not punish Preston in this world he would not forget to do so in the next.

James J. Gahan, after paying a glowing tribute to Father Malone, the patriot who ran up the American flag in times of war, said that the meeting, properly understood, was an anti-coercion meeting. He claimed the same as they do in Ireland, and that is the land for the people. When the archbishop made the charges against the doctor he put forward as the chief offense that he, the son of Irish parents, had come out and identified himself with a movement, to give back the land to the people of Ireland. That was his first offense. The man who hauled Dr. McGlynn over the coals was a man trained in the school of reaction. This man acted in obedience to an English clique which had established itself in Home. It was through this clique that Simeoni was elevated to position, and acting under their instructions he issued the celebrated circular letter to all the priests in Ireland, commanding them no longer to take part in. the agitation of the land for the people. This was the man who now was persecuting the doctor. There were 15,000 capitalists in Brooklyn receiving yearly, rent amounting to $4,000,000. If this money, instead of going into the pockets of those land owners, were put into a common fund for keeping the houses of Brooklyn in a proper condition, would it not be clear that the whole expenses of the city would be much less and that the people would be relieved from further taxation. He warned any foreign power, especially Rome, not to interfere in American politics.

Mr. John McMackin was next introduced. He said that if there was any departure from true theology it was the archbishop who was guilty. He characterized him as "this little archbishop whose head is so narrow.” Mr. McMackin severely arraigned the politicians who are at the bottom of the scheme, and paid his respects to Preston, Donnelly & Co. The other speakers were Richard McCaffrey of Greenpoint, John J. Bealin and Dr. Coughlin.


Among The “Rebels”

Dr. McGlynn's Parishioners Will Stand or Fall with the “Soggarth Aroon”

Friday evening, April 15.—After spending holy week in a properly devotional manner, the rebellious parishioners of St. Stephen's appeared again in full force at International hall, Twenty- eventh street. The proceedings were, as usual, opened by Mr. Feeny, whosaid that the editors of the  monopolistic press—lost to all sense of duty to their Maker, forgetting the season of prayer—had taken advantage of the fact that Dr. McGlynn's parishioners had not met on Good Friday, to parade in their venal sheets that the parishioners had concluded to ho-d no more meetings; that the threat of excommunication by the archbishop had had its effect; that the committee of thirty-five were quarreling; that Dr. McGlynn had been deserted. Ali this. Mr. Feeny declared, was false, and came with bad grace from a press that had for the last four months well nigh boycotted all mention of these meetings The parishioners of St. Stephen's had made a note of the unjust treatment of Dr. McGlynn and his friends by the “dishonest, unreliable” press of New York city. The parishioners were going to hold meetings every Friday, excepting holy days, until the soggarth aroon again appeared before the altar of St. Stephen's and from there blessed them.

The following resolutions, denouncing the action of the archbishop in sending Father Curran to retirement during the last ten days of Lent, were read and adopted:

“Resolved, That we, in mass meeting assembled, endorse the act of the Rev. Dr. Curran and tender him our congratulations for the manly stand he has taken, and ask him in God's mime to continue in the same Christian course.

“Resolved, That we condemn the action of Archbishop Corrigan in this respect as unbecoming a Christian minister, whose duty it is to inculcate the Christian doctrine and Christian practices; and be it furthermore

“Resolved, That we denounce the infamous circular calling on the priests of this diocese asking them to subscribe their names, and, therefore, manifest their belief that the statement in that document set forth, that the Rev. Dr. McGlynn is vain and vindictive, as a breach of the command of God—which says: 'Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor;' and, furthermore, we hold up to the public gaze the Rev. Monsignor Preston, Fathers Lynch and Edwards, the clerical body guard of the archbishop and the arch enemies of our beloved pastor, Rev. Edward McGlynn. and recommend them to the prayerful consideration of the faithful.”

Dr. Henry Carey gave notice that in spite of the reports of the press to the contrary the meetings of St. Stephen's parishioners would be continued. Dr. McGlynn would never goto Rome as a suspended priest. Speaking of the secret circular which had been sent around among the pastors for signatures, and which had proved a boomerang for the archbishop, the appearance of one name had surprised him, that of Father Kelly, whom Dr. McGlynn had befriended on more than one occasion.

Speeches were made by Messrs. Moran, McMackin, Steers and Bealin. The audience found vent for its feeling in frequent applause, some of the points eliciting enthusiasm being as follows: “A number of politicians have undoubtedly got into the confidence of some of the heads of the church.” “Events are occurring throughout the country which will show those men that they have made a mistake in striking down one of the friends of the poor.” “When they (the hierarchy) resolved among themselves to decapitate this honored pastor they thought that, as before, the breaking down of a man as a deposed priest would be looked upon as final—but they have made a mistake.” “The doctor was tried, but it was in the gambling dens by men who had piled up enormous wealth which they took from the poor.” “Dr. McGlynn was not invited to go to Rome, but he was told to publicly admit that he had sinned and then go to Rome as a criminal.” “The archbishop asserted that the theory was condemned by the church. A bishop in another country prefaced his pastoral with the remark that he had no right to talk to them on the subject, but said substantially that the and belonged to the people. Questions of land were never made questions of theology.” “Those who have signed this document know that it is a lie, and they should be suspended.” “The priest who, after signing the circular, would say mass commits a sacrilege.” “An archbishop who has an income of $40,000 a year can keep the church for a few years. Continue doing as you have done and stand by Doctor McGlynn. Remember a priest he is, and a priest he always will be.”

Mr. Feeny closed the meeting at half-past 10 o'clock. The parishioners will henceforth meet weekly on Friday in the same hall.


Father Maguire and Other Germans Address the Archbishop

This is published in the New York papers as having been presented to Archbishop Corrigan on Sunday last:

Most Reverend Sir: Last Saturday a liberal Catholic (he calls himself O'Donoghue) made the assertion in one of the leading morning papers that an attempt was made on the part of authority to coerce the priests of New York to sign an address to your grace wherein we assure you of our loyalty and obedience, and disapprove of the action for the Rev. Dr. McGlynn in the Henry George revolutionary movement.

Now, we declare said assertion entirely false. We, the German priests of New York city who have signed the document, were informed that we were perfectly at liberty to sign or refuse our signatures. We put our names to the address freely and without compulsion or coercion. Several of our number have not as yet been requested to sign, but they are anxious to have an opportunity to do so. If we had been requested by any one to sign an address endorsing the Henry George land confiscation or robber theory, we would have refused oursignatures firmly and emphatically.

We have been taught from childhood that the church of Christ is a perfectly organized society, wherein the bishop of Rome is the supreme teacher and judges in matters of faith and regulation of morality. The bishops are teachers and judges in their respective territory. All the faithful, priests as well as laity. are obliged to respect and obey their bishops; but they have theliberty to appeal from their decision to Rome. When Rome has spoken bishops and people submit.

“Roma locuta causa fitiita.” What would intelligent men say if a contestant in a lawsuit should insult the judge and jury and appeal from them to the spectators in the court room for a final decision?

The Catholic church is the militant church in thespiritual order, her commander inchief is the pope, her division generals are the bishops, her officers the clergy. The church is constantly engaged in warfare against the devil and the false maxims and principles of the infidel world. Now, if at the time of war a subordinate officer should disobey his general, and by eloquent appeals seduce the soldiers into insubordination, what would be done with this rebellious officer: If a general in battle should disobey the positive commands of the general in chief, what would be his punishment? A good Catholic will obey his pastors, a good priest will obey his commander, the bishop, and all will obey the commander in chief, the holy father, in matters of faith and morality.

For the last six months the Catholic clergy of New York have been persistently misrepresented by certain parties as if they were followers of Henry George and sympathizer of the Rev. Dr. McGlynn in his defiant attitude to civil and ecclesiastical laws and constitutional enactments. We have borne these misrepresentations patiently in the hope that Dr. McGlynn and his followers might have time to reflect and retract their revolutionary doctrines. But when the public papers represent these men in their insubordination to legitimate authority as the representatives and champions of the Catholic priests of New York, and when our silence would be taken as acquiescence, patience ceases to be a virtue, and we are forced by our convictions and the loyalty and obedience we owe the church into a solemn protest against these accusations.

We, the undersigned, have no sympathy with revolutionary or communistic doctrines, we cannot approve of the actions of men who endeavor to destroy the respect and obedience due to law and legitimate authority, be the same civil or ecclesiastical.

Assuring your grace of our deep felt sympathy in your present light for law. Authority and justice, we are your obedient sons in Christ.

This address is signed by the Rev. John Maguire, the Rev. John Daily and some fifty other “German priests.”


The Archbishop's Last Effort to Get Himself Endorsed

New York Tribune.

The recent attempt to coerce the Catholic clergy of this diocese into signing a condemnation of Dr. McGlynn has proved a failure. The terms in which Dr. McGlynn, his numerous friends of the clergy, and the parishioners of St. Stephen's church were alluded to were too odious and the glare of publicity too strong for the project. Now the archbishop's friends have rewritten the document, omitting Dr. McGlynn's name, and have mailed it to such priests as they think can bedepended on to sign it. This was sent. out, accompanied by a letter signed by Father Lynch as “secretary,” last Tuesday or Wednesday. The real purpose of the document is disclosed by the frank statement. made by Father Lynch himself to several of the clergy, that “it was for use at Rome against the efforts of Cardinal Gibbons and Bishop Keane.”

“Most Reverend Archbishop: We, the priests of the archdiocese of New York, coma before you to express our sincere attachment to you and our unfeigned and cheerful loyalty to your authority. We recognize in you our ecclesiastical superior, who, being in full communion with the head of the Catholic church, the successor of St. Peter, lawfully rule, teach and judge this portion of the flock of Christ—the archdiocese of New York.

“Conformably to the exhortation of St. Paul, we look to you as our prelate who speaks to us the word of God, whose faith we follow. And, pondering the grave injunction of the same apostle, 'Obey your prelates and be subject to them, for they watch as being to render an account of your souls, that they may do this with joy and not with grief; for this is not expedient for you;' Hebrews xiii., 17. We desire also on this occasion to record our emphatic disapproval and reprobation of the act of disobedience and disloyalty to your authority of which a certain member of our body has made himself guilty—an act of disloyalty aggravated by his subsequent course. We have been patiently hoping and praying that our dear brother would change his mind and return to his father's house. But observing that our charitable silence is construed into acquiescence in and approval of disobedience and that it causes some surprise both here and abroad—learning. moreover. that it is publicly asserted that he is believed to uphold the cause of the clergy in general, we feel it our duty to make this solemn declaration to you, that the clergy of the archdiocese of New York utterly condemn all disobedience to lawfully constituted authority, especially to the authority of the church, and can have no sympathy with the efforts of those who in any way set that authority aside. Our motto shall always be, “An obedient man shall speak of victory.” Proverbs, xxi., 28.”


Dr. McGlynn's Case From an English Point of View.

Birmingham, England. April 6—the Standard has pleased me very much, and, as for the McGlynn episode, you are making history. For many years past my respect and esteem for the Irish and English Catholic priests has steadily increased, and, Protestant as I am, I have come to the conclusion that they are more truly the followers of Christ in their intimate connection with the sorrows and joys of the “common people,” and their deep helpful sympathy with the sufferings of the poor, than are the ministers of any other sect that I have come in contact with. In them, “rather than in the pomp and glory of Rome, is to be found the secret of tho strength of the Catholic church, and if the facts of the case are once fairly brought under the notice ofthe pope away from the influence of the Italian cardinals, he will doubtless see the significance of Father McGlynn's noble protest on behalf of downtrodden humanity, and realize the vital importance to the church herself at this juncture (when the laborers of Great Britain and Ireland have become the masters of the United Kingdom) that nothing be done in her name out of harmony with the words of the Master: “Come unto Me all ye that labor and are heavy laden and I will give you rest.” No church can hope to continue to exist much longer that is not in heart- felt sympathy with the poor.

Thomas F. Walker,


Easter Sunday at St. Stephen's

On Easter Sunday, at the ten o'clock mass in St. Stephen's church, thirteen pews were kept locked and empty, while scores of the poorer parishioners remained standing. Father Colton announced from the altar that the church debt was $135,000, an increase of $8,000 since January 1!


Priests Who Sympathize With the Archbishop

Fathers Colton and Callahan of St. Stephen's are said, on good authority, to have signed the first address to the archbishop, in which Dr. McGlynn was characterized as “vain and vindictive.” The names of Father O'Kelly and Father Dougherty of St. Monica's were appended to the same document, Father Dougherty is chaplain of the Sixty-ninth regiment, the members of which are highly indignant at his action.


Good Land Doctrine InPottstown, Pa.

The Knights of Labor Want Taxation Put on Land Held for Speculation

The Knights of Labor in Pottstown, Pa., see the light. At a meeting of the Scattergood assembly No. 7,307, resolutions were adopted requesting the “borough fathers and all others having authority in the matter in said borough and townships in so regulate or bring means to bear in the regulation of local taxation on such real estate as enterprises rentable buildings as to greatly reduce the taxation thereon, and instead to make the equivalent of public revenue by placing an extra tax upon all lots of ground that are bought and held or kept especially for a rise in the price thereof by reason of the improvements made upon the adjoining and surrounding land and properties; whereby the improving, public spirited citizen is made to enrich the non-improving do-nothing capitalist and often times absentee landlord, who thereby retards and to a great extent prevents, the progress of the community.”


Western Farmers Mortgage Even Their Chickens

Atlantic, Iowa, .April 14.—It is a hard matter for people here to buy even the smallest thing in the nature of a luxury. I know of farmers who have had to mortgage their chickens to pay interest on what they owe. No one who has not been here can realize the condition our farmers are in.

John Thomas


Mr. Pentecost at Danbury, Conn.

The Rev. Hugh O. Pentecost Lectured on the land question to a great audience at Danbury, Conn., on Wednesday night last.


Page 6


Life In Dakota

An Outspoken Editor Unbosoms Himself

How a Prosperous Paper is Managed—The Secret of Success in the Territories—“Uptown” and “Across Town”—A Gambler's Aspirations

Dakota, April, 1887.—I am the proprietor and all-around editor of a weekly newspaper published in a railroad town in this territory. As a collector of local news, I rub against everybody living in the town. As exchange editor, I have this north western country under toy eye. As an alleged thinker, sitting in the chair of chief editor, I am supposed by my readers to formulate opinions. Hence I am passably well equipped to speak of men and things here and hereabouts. I know the personal history and business relations of everybody in town. 1 know, too, the drift of territorial things social, political and financial.

I also know how to nurse my own business. I know how to adopt a happy vein in speaking of my leading advertisers in my paper. I know when I may avoid mentioning those business men who do not advertise with me. I can draw up a paid reading matter notice ingeniously. I can make up my paper scientifically, the best paying matter being put to the from. As editor, I am nowadays manufacturing an article of consumption for pay.

In the present era of my career the local columns of my paper praise many and intentionally offend none. I am a professional democrat when I write, and I oft en make mention of the principles of Jefferson, but do not print them. I arraign the opposing party by attacking it as a whole and stigmatizing nobody in particular. I advocate principles of reform, though I have been careful not to look too closely at the doings of officeholders here in order to find occasion to have my principles put in operation. My pen easily weeps through the distant and nebulous, but never jars and blunts itself in a shock against the near by and concrete. So I am called a moderate man, a temperate partisan, and am not generally disliked.

There is another newspaper in town. It supports, necessarily, the other political party. Its editor is a sensible man. He and I divide the county printing, see that the commissioners give out a good deal of it, and differ as to questions of state before congress. We also take turn about for six months at a time in printing the official proceedings of the city council, for our western town is a city. My paper was the first here, and hence I choose the last six months of the year, for the proceedings pay best then. Our job rates are the same. We put the same amount of reading matter in our papers. We are about equally enterprising. We divide honors; my rival editor cultivates poetry and tine forms of expression and prints church news: I am not above writing slang if it cuts a corner, and I profess to love sensations in type. We have “pooled” the journalism of our community.

A little point I had almost overlooked. My rival editor and I eschew personal politics, cave with respect to ourselves. We understand each other. He is my target and I am his. I take care that before the community he embodies the hateful hypocrisy, the deplorable degeneracy and the unpatriotic tendency to imperial centralization of the republican party. He has a stock phraseology with which he characterizes me: and good little republican boys and pious old mugwump ladies look upon me as the unregenerate democracy incarnate. So the devil plays with the innocents of our little town.

My rival and I print all the news and make news of everything. If a tire runs off a wheel, we print it, with the name of the river of the wagon, the owner of the team and the man in front of whose house it came off, if they are friends or advertisers. We also print the name of the man who made the broken down wagon if he is not an advertiser. The gem-like principle seen glittering in this bit of confession pervades the performance of our journalistic duties. We both scissor our sentiments and opinions, and frugally fill up our forms with stereotype plates. Thus the seasons come and go. We two editors move along with them, wearing overcoats in winter and thin goods in summer. We conform ourselves to conditions as we find them.

But there are seas beneath the seas. Sometimes I amuse myself in conceiving a genuine deep water newspaper—one that would go clear down to the truth. What a gloriously fallow field is open in this western country for the newspaper delivering itself up to the utterance of facts as they are. The facts can be had, but the newspaper that prints them might not prove popular. The frauds perpetrated upon a confiding public by my rival editor and myself would be worth only a ten line notice in it if other men were to be given their deserts.

For two years after selling here, which was half a dozen years ago, I drudged away indefatigably with my coat off. I had brought with me from my good old father's house an aptness for quoting poor Richard's proverbs, some prejudices favorable to square dealing, and certain habits formed on a code of rules observed by the honest, steady people of my native town. I personally performed in the office all the work I was capable of. I had learned typesetting and read up in politics to fit myself for editor. I looked forward to earning at homely work, accumulation through economy, and rising to influence and, perhaps, honors and fortune by spreading honest sentiments before an appreciative public. As I have said, I remained a most active slave to such notions for two years. During that period my finely drawn editorial opinions, conscientiously given, made me whatever powerful enemies I have today. My setting type, my keeping books, my ceaseless work indoors, did not focus much influence anywhere out side. One day I awoke to certain facts. Putting good literary quality into local items is throwing time away. Straightforward, sweeping truth in editorial articles is often unpalatable to many subscribers and shocking to others. High class journalism is for the select few; the average man will assimilate coarse food. Politics is a game in which you back your friends that they may back you. These things had been told me early in my career as a newspaper man ; but it had seemed to me that the men imparting them were venal, superficial, unendowed with the higher traits. So I went in for an experience of my own and bought it in costly time. But as I awoke that day, after two years of work, when I was reckoning up the various valuable pieces in my heap of experience, I reached certain striking “points” that had not been given me. They were: while for two years my ceaseless energies had about enabled me to meet my cotes, the man who owned the lot on which the building stood in which I rented my printing office had grown some $2,000 the richer through its increase in value. And he had not been working. My printing materials, paper, ink and type were costing me more per given number of pounds than ever . This was, first, because of advanced railroad freight rates; secondly, because of agreements among manufacturers as to production and prices. This higher cost was not in consequence of my man's work. I had thought of trying to build a cottage for my growing little family, but I found that, somehow, the cost of a lot represented the savings of a year or more if I continued to work and save as hard as I had done. I ran over in my mind the list o f people whose only work was in the way of making things scarce that other men needed. They were all getting rich by not working.

One good, pregnant revelation is enough for me. I s aw the world above the world. There was a crumbling down in my mind of predilections, presuppositions, traditions and proverbs favorable to work. I washed my hands clean of all marks of toil. I put on my coat and kept it on. I hired some cheap labor to take off its coat and do badly what I had done well. I began to sit around in good clot hes, keeping an eye on things and promoting speculations.

Four years ago the present spring I made a trip in an unsettled part of the territory in company with a government official. He had a “tip” as to where a railroad company had already surveyed a projected line. He and I decided that at a certain point on the survey there would in the course of time be a town needed. We soon after took possession of several hundred acres of public land there—by cheap, convenient and ostensibly legal methods. Today the railroad is built beyond our land, and a small town is built upon it. We two have yet in our possession about one-quarter of our original tract, having been obliged to surrender most of it to avaricious railroad managers before they consented to put a station on our land. I have a little newspaper running in the infant town, and it booms my real estate. You perceive I have learned what genuine business is.

Above the world of honest and fat-witted toilers is a world of adroit and philosophical good fellows, who are schemers, speculators and gamblers on human nature and in man's needs. Into whose possession has the eighty per cent of illegal land entries of Dakota gone? Into the toilers? Hardly. Are these great anaconda railroad lines being stretched all through this western country by the working masses for their own uses and benefit? Not entirely so, we can say, when we reflect that the original promoters of the Union Pacific railroad put only $36,000 into the venture and that the rest of the capital came of a government subsidy and from the buyers of bonds. Are the small farmers of Dakota, the majority of its inhabitants, running this territory? The bonanza farmers, the rich bankers, the politicians, the railroad kings, the cattle barons, might speak pertinently to the question.

The taxing powers run Dakota. An institution exerting a direct taxing power is the railroad. It reaches out and covers the territory, a colossal vampire, sucking away all the life blood every community can yield and survive. It does destroy some communities in order to build up others. Another taxing power is an unseen one, and one of whose existence the common herd hardly seems aware. Yet it exacts its tribute through a finner grip than the khedive has upon the Egyptian fellah. It gets its life through a protective tariff and the combinations of manufacturers. Its invisible tax collectors have laid their itching palms on nearly all that the farmers here eat, wear and use as implements. Still another taxing power is the money lender. If the homesteader is to live, make improvements and ship a crop, he must have live stock and farm tools. To get them the average man must borrow cash. The result is, prime real estate mortgages at seven or eight per cent. A bad crop or misfortune in any form feeds the mortgage and often brings a foreclosure. But the taxing power that rests on the firmest foundation is that which seizes on the land itself wherever it exhibits a value or the possibility of soon having a value. A thousand patient pioneers, through rough, repellent, isolated labor, under the homestead laws, convert to their possession at most :200,000 acres of land. Each one of their thousand farms equals in value perhaps an acre in a side street in a town, or a plat 25×100 feet in a small city. Hint to one of them that land in any way should bear all taxation and he would fall into a paroxysm of terror, believing he might be made worse off than he is. Yet a syndicate of half a dozen millionaires may purchase 200,000 acres of Dakota land and the poor farmer will think this an evidence of how wealthy men may become in this great and free country. He cannot foresee that his children will find it the harder to get land to work upon. He does not know that he and his band of a thousand pioneers are made the small fry in comparison with the enormously wealthy, and will have the less to say in the legislature, before the judges, to the railroad companies, through the press, and from the pulpit, because of the powers of the wealthy, he cannot see that if taxes were laid on the values of land he would escape a hundred cuts now made from his income, about which he has nothing to say, and know exactly what the one slice would be, know what his neighbors would pay, and have opened to him vacant and unused lands all about him for himself and his children.

Who are securing the profits accruing from the increased price in Dakota lands? The business in this year of our Lord is carried on scientifically. So-called “improvement companies” are formed by manipulators of capital. Hungry lawyers stand, sentinel like, in every county of the territory, and on the slightest promise of an “improved” real estate market an improvement company's agents are informed, and the sharks hasten to enjoy the meal awaiting them. Yelping newspapers bark “Boom ! Boom !” Men with a little idle capital go money mad. And a game of chance is begun with the law all on its side, but which is a lottery, skin faro, a church fair grab game, and a stock market all in one. In playing this game discounts are made on a population that a town is to have ten years hence. It is a safe game for big capital—values seldom go down with a rush. Booms last long after the wary and experienced have foreseen their termination.

Since the day when I made the startling but profitable discovery that I was losing wealth by working, I have looked out upon Dakota mankind as through a philosophers' window. I was not long in framing the moral code for a modern editor, to which I have adverted in this letter. Surely, why should a man live after the manner and morals of the past when he becomes aware of the nineteenth century ways? If loafing pays and working does not, who will not loaf if he can? As an unselfish philosopher, let me submit an observation or two before closing, with my regards.

There is an aristocracy forming in this new far west country, based on what has perpetuated every long-lived aristocracy—the ownership of the earth's resources. How plain this aristocracy is to him who will read as he runs. “Up town” and “across town” are, it is your impression, simply terms indicating direction and locality. Now, let any smart, kid-gloved young woman of my town here say “up town” and “across town” to you in the course of a chat with you. Then will you know that, in her vocabulary of significant cant, “up town” signifies the homes of the wealthy, a locality in which the exterior of things is pleasant to the sight, a stretch of urban country where things are pleasant, clean and sweet. And in her insinuating euphemism “across town” denotes a terra incognita to all as dainty as she. It is in fact a sort of social ostrich stomach where any conglomeration may find lodgment. It is the habitation of poverty, of ignoble card-table speculation, of adventurous womankind, of the trash that swarms to dirty boarding houses. Dwellings are rented there, and so their paint is weather worn, and the fences are old and the gardens neglected. There is a gulf between the people “up town” and those “across town.”

I remember two conversations that I lately held with men from “across town” in my capacity as everybody's newspaper acquaintance. One was a wage-working man. He said that when the whistles blew for work of a wintry morning the only people astir were in “across town;” when the maker or repairer of anything of use in “up town” was to be looked up folks went “across town” to find him; when there was a great deal of talk about booms in business the workers derived from it just what they sot out of the world before—a living. He said he had observed that “across town” polled three times as many votes as “up town.”

The other man I talked with was one wearing expensive clothes and fine gold jewelry. According to popular notion he sews his bank notes up in his coat, when he has any, for he may be obliged to leave town on a moment's notice, as he is one of the sporting gentry. He spoke in a vein of sadness and regret. He was sorry he was known as a gambler. He intended to get out of the business as soon as possible—as soon as his pile was big enough to permit him to go into real estate, a railroad, a stock market, a pool, or something of the kind. Work ? Not much. He had a mind above work. His mind was attuned to what pays better than work. Work ? Not in this age of sham, folly, fraud, injustice, hypocrisy and advantageous speculation.

B. F. C.


The Story Of A House

Everett P. Wheeler Tells It to the New York Free Trade Club—Rents, Not Wages, Get the Benefit of Protection

The New York free trade club has substituted for its bi-monthly club meetings a monthly meeting in room 24 of the Cooper Union, which is thrown open to the public, and at which an address is delivered by a prominent speaker. The first of the series was held on Maren. 17, when Thomas G. Shearman spoke on the effect of the tariff and wages, and the second on April 14, with an address by Everett P. Wheeler, president of the club, on “The Story of a House: how the tariff affects rent.”

Mr. Wheeler began by giving his own experience in building houses on some property in which he was interested, when he found that the materials which under a natural system would have cost $10,000 for each house, were increased in price by the protective tariff to about $12,500. As he had only $50.000 to invest, he was therefore compelled to build only four houses instead of five, to furnish one fifth less employment to the laborers, and to charge one-fifth more rent on each house to obtain the same rate of interest on his capital. He then proceeded to analyze the various items of cost and show how each had been raised in price-by protection.

Taking first tho brass cocks of the water faucets he gave an interesting history of tho copper monopoly, touching on the conditions which for many years enabled copper producers to sell to foreign smelters at lower prices than were obtained at home, which not only laid a burden on American consumers of copper, but also threw into the hands of foreigners business which would have otherwise been secured by our own workers of copper. Explaining that none of the increase in price was used to pay higher wages, he demonstrated that it supply amounted to increased rent for the men who, in owning copper mines, have appropriated one set of natural opportunities.

Next, turning to lead pipe. he illustrated how here, too, the tariff on lead has increased the cost to consumes with out increasing the wages of the men who manufacture lead products. In this connection the sound truth was uttered that “the mountains of lead in Missouri were the gift of the Almighty to mankind and should be treated and utilized accordingly.”

The wooden beams and floors of the house got their share of attention, and the iniquity was shown of a tariff of two dollars a thousand feet of lumber, which served not to raise wages for the men who cut the logs, but to increase the rent of the men who owned the trees. An interesting fact was told in regard to the duty on nickel, of which there is only one mine in America. By grace of congress the owner of this mine is given a monopoly of the nickel business of this country, but he does not seem to share the profit with his workmen, for when, in 1883, the duty was reduced from thirty cents to fifteen cents, the resulting difference in price came wholly out of the rent, showing that the wages were fixed by general competition, and not by the tariff. Climbing to the roof of the house, that colossal fraud, the duty on tinplate, was duly touched up.

A history was also given of the marble industry, and the absurdity forcibly displayed of giving protection to the extent of sixty-five cents per cubic foot to a purely natural product like this, the wages for digging out which amount to less than fifty cents per cubic foot; and a brief account given of the great strike of the glassblowers. This w a s caused by a demand for ten per cent increase in wages, which was refused by the protected manufacturers, although their protection had been nearly doubled.

At the close of the address. Mr. .T. P. Kohler asked several questions of Mr. Wheeler, in explaining which he pointed out that an abolition of the tariff would simply result in transferring the illegitimate profit from the men who produced the materials to those who owned the land on which the house was built. Replies were made by Mr. Wheeler and also by E. J. Shriver, who agreed with Mr. Kohler on the principle of land taxation, but thought that the latter made a mistake in minimizing the burdens of the tariff, tho getting rid of which Mr. Shriver claimed must be the first step to complete reform.

The next meeting was announced for May 12, in the same hall, at 8 p. m., the speaker and subject to be given out later.


What the Cornish Miners Work For

London Figaro.

The prince of Wales, in his capacity of duke of Cornwall, has had a considerably better year than the queen in her capacity of duchess of Lancaster. The queen, as I mentioned a fortnight ago, was able to draw during 1880 only £50,000 for her private use from her duchy revenues, whereas the heir apparent has had no less than £60,563 3s. 3d. placed to his bankers' credit in the shape of the net profits of his valuable Cornish property. Things are looking up in the mining country. Arrears of rent, which were considerably over £13,000 at the beginning of l886, barely exceeded £10,000 at its close, while the royalties due on mining property had been all paid up, with the exception of some £600 or £700.


Lux Didn't Make It, but He Owned It

San Francisco Weekly Star.

Mr. Lux of Miller & Lux died the other day. He owned 700,000 acres of land, valued at from $15,000,000 to $20,000,000, a large portion of which land he had got for little or nothing. Never improved it, and demanded heavy tribute for its use. Thousands of families could be sustained upon that land, but it is denied them. Did Lux make that land? No, God did. Did God make it for Lux? Not any more than he did for ail mankind. But Lux held it under the form “of law,” and though it might give homes to and feed a hundred thousand people, they may starve if Mr. Lux or his heirs will not consent to its occupancy and use. What a monstrous doctrine!


Facts to Chew Upon

Evening Sun.

The sale of the estate of Patrick Dickie shows a very heavy increase in value. The last sale of the property on the corner of Lispenard street and Broadway was in 1824, when it sold for $5,500. It has just sold for $225,000, an increase of 4,100 per cent. The property 144 and 150 Chambers street sold for $12,000 in 1850 and $83,350 in last week\s sale, an increase of 686 per cent. Canal street, 274, shows an increase of 1,080; 127 Greene street shows an increase of 1,850 per cent. The other parcels show equally large percentages of increase. If a man can only hold on to property in this city he can surely get rich.


Why Mining Stocks Are High

How The People Fare Who Do the Work of Mining

Correspondent Wilkesbarre, Pa., Evening Leader.

Freeland, April 4.—Humiliating indeed is the condition of affairs that surrounds the miner. It is such that drives men to the brink of despair, and makes them feel that life is not worth the living. Yet it is consoling to know that there is left in this vicinity one journalist possessed o£ manhood and moral courage to raise his voice in behalf of the oppressed miners; to write a truthful history of their real"'condition, and hold the same aloft in the bright light of public opinion.

The facts and figures presented by the correspondent clearly prove one of two things, namely, that the miners of today are in reality as much enslaved as were the negroes before the war, or, if they are not so much oppressed as those figures would seem to indicate, then there must be a gross mismanagement in the affairs of that public institution known as the Middle coal field poorhouse.

In either case this subject should command public attention, but, it would seem that the average editor in the coal fields is afraid to touch on any subject that might arouse the ire or oppose the interests of the powers that be. I venture to state that- the average monthly earnings in 1886 for miners in this region will not reach $35 per month. I know of one miner whose average monthly earnings for the year 1886 was $36.53. After deducting I house rent, coal, doctor, etc., this man had left the sum of $27.38 to feed and clothe live persons for one month. In the meantime, this miner used eighty-three kegs of powder at the average price of $2.81 per keg, or, at a total cost of $233.23.  This powder, I understand, is bought by the company at $1.25 per keg, or a total cost of $123.75. Subtract this sum from $233.23, and we find that the company made $100.48 profit on the powder used by one miner for said year.

I know of industrious miners who never see a dollar of their earnings from June to January; who are living on an allowance of provisions just such as the superintendent of the company store thinks is sufficient to keep body and soul together. Well do I remember that cold December morning in 1885 when business called me to visit one of those company stores. I behold the wife of an old friend, the honored mother of an industrious miller's six children, standing at the counter talking to one of those arrogant company store clerks. Her voice trembled with emotion, and tear drops were visible trickling down the furrows of lier once beautiful face. I heard the clerk remark that she had her allowance of provisions on the first of the month, “and you know,” he added, “that you are not allowed dry goods.” Dear reader, what do you think this poor woman wanted? She wanted just two yards of Hannel for the purpose of dressing her unborn babe on its advent into this world. Mr. Berner, a well known merchant of Freeland, made the following statement from the platform in Donop's hall at the business men's meeting last Friday evening. He said that some time ago some of his regular customers removed to Hazle Brook, better known as the Lumber Yard, a new mining village near hero. Mr. Berner followed his customers to their new home and received their orders as usual, but next day imagine his surprise when notified by a coal and iron policeman that the road leading from Eckley to the lumber yard was private property, and if he (Berner) should trespass thereon that he would be prosecuted according to law. Mr. Berner could not deliver his goods in the God-forsaken village of Hazle Brook, because the village, the land, the breaker, the roads, the houses, yea, and the inhabitants thereof, are claimed by a tyrant to be his private property. A great many more facts could be advanced to corroborate the assertion on your correspondent, all of which are well known to the public. Yet, there is no bold voice raised in the editorial columns of our local press to expose the wrong or denounce the iniquity. I would like to see some one of the great independent daily newspaper send a representative into this region, investigate this matter and hear from the lips of the people the true story of their wrongs.


Giving the Antidote

Caledonia, Minn., Argus.

Under the above caption the Pioneer Press gives its reasons for thinking that “Georgeism has furnished its own antidote,” in an article which is a remarkable example of how erroneous a conclusion the human mind is capable of drawing from the soundest of premises. It admits that Mr. George's land theory has been accepted “by no insignificant number of readers;” that his book “Progress and Poverty” has had a phenomenal sale; that “no person who reads it after arriving at years of understanding could escape from being more or less influenced by it;” that the remedy he proposes “appeared less and less repugnant as it was thought over and set in contrast with the existing abuses,” but insists that the fact that a workingman has been nominated for mayor in Chicago; that the socialists and j anarchists are joining in his support: that Mr. George has been there to aid him, and that these classes are advocating Mr. George's theory, is proof conclusive of the dangerous tendency of his doctrines and is the antidote for their poison which could not be otherwise supplied.

Such reasoning does violence to the reputation of our eminent contemporary for clear sightedness. For years this country has been disturbed by a widespread discontent. Nihilism is discontent run mad. Labor and granger organizations are but the forms vi its expression. Each represents a deep sense of wrongs caused by something, which each attempts to define and remedy. Labor attacks capital, the greenbacker berates gold, the granger points to railroad monopoly and the free trader sees in a protective tariff the prolific source of it all. The danger to government and society lies, not in an examination into and removal of the real cause or causes of this discontent, but in a repression which can only further increase the danger by compressing expanding forces. It is the recognition that this discontent has its cause in great social and political wrongs that has furnished “Progress and Poverty” with its million readers, and leads thoughtful men to hope that it contains an exposition of the cause and supplies the remedy. Is it not, then, matter of congratulation rather than of alarm that this great, growing, savage element of discontent which has found its expression in boycotts, strikes, vindictive and destructive legislation and dynamite, should come to accept as the true remedy one which appears less and less repugnant as it is thought over and not in contrast with existing abuses.” Is it singular that the workingmen of the country, who had come to believe that their only remedy lay in the direction of force, should be gladly following a man who touches them that they mistake the cause of their wrongs and points it out so clearly; touches them that capital and labor are not antagonistic forces; that the seeming polarity is but the secret play of another unseen force, and that the remedy can be applied without a jar to any existing condition of right? To us it seems that so far is the Chicago following from an antidote to “Georgeism” that Mr. George's plan may be the antidote for this dangerous discontent.


Two Labor Party Organs

Our Principles, published under the auspices of the united labor party of the Twenty-second ward, Brooklyn, and the Bulletin of the Twenty-third district, New York, are teaching the people in those districts how their ballots can aid them.


Fined For Building

How People Who Build Houses on Vacant Lots Are Punished—Figures That Tell the Story

The auction sales of real estate at the real estate exchange have for the last two or three weeks been quite well attended, and the prices realized may be taken as fairly representing the real value of the various parcels sold. Picking out from these sales the following pieces of vacant and improved land and comparing the prices realized with the value as estimated by the tax assessors, the following results are obtained:

Three lots on Fifth avenue, fronting the park, just north of l00th street, each lot 25 x 100, brought $17,400 each; they are assessed for taxation at $6,500, or 37 per cent of their value.

Two lots on the north side of Eighty-third  street, 125 feet west- of the park. sold for $12,000 each: they are assessed for taxation at $5,000. or 42 per cent of their value.

One lot on the west side of Third avenue, between Forty first and Forty-second streets, sold for $25,500; this is assessed at $8,000 or 31 per cent of its value.

Four lots on the south side of Sixty-sixth street, 375 feet west of the park, sold for $8,300 each; they are assessed at $4,000, or 48 per cent of their value.

Six lots on Eighty-eighth street, 125 feet west of the park, sold for $12,000 each; they are assessed at $4,500, or 38 per cent of their value.

One lot on the west side of Ninth avenue, fifty-one feet north of Eighty-third street, sold for $12,500; it is assessed at $6,000, or 48 per cent of their value.

Eight lots on the south side of Eighty-ninth street, 201 feet east of Riverside drive, sold for $5,950 each; they are assessed at $2,000, or 33½ per cent of their value.

One lot on the south side of l05th street, between Ninth and Manhattan avenues, sold for $6,050; it is assessed at $2,500, or 41½ per cent of its value.

 Average assessment on twenty-six unimproved lots. 38½ per cent of their true value.

Nos. 247,219 and 251 West Sixtieth street, between Tenth and Eleventh avenues, all four story dwellings, sold for a total of $28,225; they are assessed at $21,000, or 75 per cent of their value.

No. 5 East Seventy-third street, a four story residence and extension, between Fifth and Madison avenue, sold for $52.000: it is assessed at $32,000, or 61½ per cent of its value.

No. 146 East Seventy-eighth street, southeast corner of Lexington avenue, a three story residence belonging to Police Superintendent Murray, sold for $18,400; it is assessed at $10,000, or 33 per cent of its value.

No. 361 Lexington avenue, between Fortieth and Forty-first streets, a four story dwelling, sold for $20,000; is assessed for $13,000, or 65 per cent of its value.

No. 153 East Forty-fifth street, a three story dwelling, sold for $l6,400; it is assessed at $9,500, or 58 per cent of its value.

Average assessment on eight houses and lots (or improved lots) Go per cent of their value.

That is to say, the owners of the empty lots are encouraged by the government to hold their lots idle by being taxed on only 38½ per cent of the real value of the lots, while the builders or buyers of the houses are taxed on 66 per cent of the value, not only of the lots but of the houses also, and the finer and better the houses the higher they are taxed.

That this same state of things is not peculiar to New York city the following will prove:

A short time a go the city council of Boston ordered the purchase of 37,500 feet of land in South Boston for a schoolhouse site. Mayor O'Brien before approving the order determined to find out what the land was assessed at, and the assessors department informed him that it was valued on the books at 15¾ cents per foot. Now, inasmuch as the city council had ordered its purchase at 80 cents per foot or over five times the assessed valuation, Mayor O'Brien refused to approve the order without first making a public explanation of the case. In his communication the mayor says: “It appears to me, after investigating the matter, that the assessed valuation is a mere nominal figure, and does not represent in the least its true market value, and this applies to every vacant lot of land in that vicinity.”

The piece of land in question is actually worth 80 cents per foot at least, for one of the aldermen who thought the order was going to be revoked offered to take the plot at that price.


What Difference a Piece of Paper Makes

Correspondence New York Herald.

Chicago, Ill., April 16.—The city authorities decided some months ago to build an iron swing bridge at State street. It was all occupied by private citizens. and steps were taken to seize. the property needed for the improvement by the law of eminent domain. It was a piece of local folk lore, however, that a public highway had once skirted the river front and was known as Harbor street. But no record of this could be found, and as the owers of the neighboring real estate had built on this land all the way to the river's brink, it seemed as if the city would be commuted to purchase the property at an enormous figure. Still, all the clerks in the city departments were kept busy looking for the record which would establish the former existence of the street on the land now occupied by private dwellings.

Today a clerk in another department of the city bureaus was engaged in copying some of the municipal records impaired in the great fire of 1871. He came to a paragraph which excited his curiosity. Calling his superior he directed his attention to the discovery. It proved to be a clause setting forth that in the year 1854 the United States government, then holding the Fort Dearborn reservation, gave to the city of Chicago “a strip of land twenty feet wide on the south side of Chicago river, and running from the lighthouse, then in use, west to a point shown on a map in the office of the Illinois Central railroad.” It is claimed that this point was State street. It only remains now to determine whether the map referred to is still in existence. If so, it will be easily proved that the land now held by private parties is really the property of the city, as no record of any transfer of the property is estimated to be worth several millions of dollars, and should it be seized by the city several fortunes would be seriously affected.

Suppose, instead of taking this land and buildings by virtue of an accidentally preserved pen scratch, Chicago had decided to absorb its land value by taxation, would the owners of the buildings be better off or worse?


More Natural Wealth to Be Stolen for Private Use

Correspondence New York Tribune.

Ottawa, April 17.—The Canadian government's expedition to the Yukon country leaves here on Wednesday. It will consist of Dr. Dawson. assistant director of the Canadian geological survey: two subordinate members of the survey staff, and Dominion Land Survey or Ogilvie. The chief object of the expedition is to locate and make a preliminary survey of the gold fields in northern British Columbia. Strong representations have come from mining companies at Seattle,Washington territory, which desire to acquire mining rights in the district, hut will not invest capital unless tho Canadian government gives them a sure title. As miners are reported to be rushing into Canadian territory east of the 142d meridian, Messrs. Dawson and Ogilvie have been erected by an order in council police commissioners for British Columbia in case an emergency arises.


Our English Cousins

Poverty In The Midst Of Abounding Wealth

The East End of London—A Million of Men Too Exhausted by Poverty to Think or Act—A Highlander's Understanding of the Jubilee—The Progress of True Reform

Special to the Standard

London, April l2—Is trade reviving or is it not? That is the question of the hour. It is donated in the precincts of the Bank of England, and is discussed with feverish eagerness in the workshops of Birmingham and Glasgow. To a certain extent it has revived, and I think that it is still reviving. But alas! how many are there in this land of wealth to whom good trade is the same as bad, the day, of commerce as dark as its night. The east end of London is the most disheartening thing in the world. Great writers of prose and verse have described cities over which famine had folded its wings. But after a time famine would flee away, the empty shops would be refilled by rejoicing viands, the sounds of lamentation would give place to merry music. But here famine broods forever. Its nest is here. One of that large and powerful class of American papers that are so nobly and so ably devoted to the cause of labor lately asked why the east end of London did not rise in its wrath and its numbers and put an end to this state of matters. The writer of that article not seen the east end of London. He had not seen some million of human beings too exhausted by poverty to be able to think or act; too reduced in every element of manhood to be fit for any contest with their wealthy, active, energetic masters. I have no great respect for the slave holders of America. But to compare the condition of those who live in the east end of London to the slave, for whose sake America plunged into her dreadful war, would be a foul and wicked libel on the slave owners. A committee is at present sitting in London to inquire into the action of the charity commissioners. That action is briefly robbery. They take away money left for and meant for the poor and give it to the wealthy city companies, who spend it, not to put too fine a point upon the matter, in getting drunk. Some of these charities belong to the country, and Mr. Jesse Collings, in giving evidence, told us some most remarkable things about the manner in which the country is being depopulated. Gradually, but not slowly, the green fields of England are being utterly cleared of the English laborer. He will, I fear, soon be as extinct as beavers, and will be imported by gentlemen who own estates as a curiosity, with an inscription at the gates, “This way to the English laborer—the only genuine specimen in Britain.” Seven hundred of these unfortunate men arrive every week in London. What becomes of them? God knows!

Meantime, while the east end of London consists of four square miles of perpetual tragedy our nobs and snobs are holding what they ca11 a jubilee. A Scottish M. P. with whom I dined the other night told me a funny story anent this jubilee rage. One of the Scottish sheriffs called a meeting to raise money for the wealthiest woman in Christendom. He said that he need not explain to those present the meaning of the jubilee. An old Highlander said that perhaps as some of those present might not quite understand, he himself would explain. And then, taking out an old and worn Gaelic bible, he read from various places all about the jubilee of the Jews. “And so.” he said, “what the jubilee really means is that the queen, at the end of fifty years, is going to give us all back our lands.” The meeting broke up in the wildest confusion of enthusiasm, and marched away with bagpipes playing and with shouts of “God save the Queen!” And now that unfortunate sheriff has to “explain,” I wish him joy of his task.

She certainly is a foolish, proud old woman. To see a British drawing room is to see the absurdest sight in the world. There stands—or rather sits—the queen, for she has a stool under her dress. There is Albert Edward and the others, with their half stupid, half sottish faces. The only dignified figure of the group is the princess of Wales, with that mournful face which tells the sadness of her home. And now passes a procession of absurdly dressed men and half naked women. The weather  here has been dreadful, yet some of the poor girls who are presented to her majesty have had to appear in a dress which would make one think that they were about to go to bed on a July night. Look on this picture and on that—the queen's drawing room and the east end of London.

Among those who have looked upon it are the socialists. We who are land restorationists, are of course opposed to socialism. But we respect all men everywhere also are in earnest, and none are more earnest than the socialist. I never saw in my life so many men so recently poor or so ninny men with thoughtful and resolved faces as I beheld at one of the socialists parades. There can be no doubt that they have created horrible dismay among those of vast possessions. There is a savage cry for their suppression, and the police treat them with brutality, the magistrates without the semblance of justice, and the nobility would hang every one of them it it could. Such a policy if further carried out will have the usual effect. An eminent Russian socialist lately said to me, significantly: “If a town is so defenseless as London,” and he mentioned to me one or two methods by which an irreparable blow could be struck at that center of the world's wealth called “the city”—so ingenious and so simple that I fairly started with terror. We must let the socialists alone. They are peaceable and will be peaceable as long as we do not meddle with them. but if wealth matches itself against them in the game of force, wealth will suffer.

Ireland is always with us. But while once she was with us in hatred, now she is with us in love. I mean by us, the democracy. It only needed a strong hand like that of Mr. Gladstone to tear down the curtain that separated us, and we were ready to become one. While a tory press ranting of disunion, Britain and Ireland are more closed united today than ever they were before. When a leading Irish orator is announced to address a meeting in Britain he has a crowded audience of British, and British orators are becoming almost as popular in Ireland as the justly loved and honored leaders of the Irish race. A sharp struggle is before Ireland, bur it will be short. And Ireland will not stand alone. The best and noblest of this country will be at her side, sharing in her difficulties, endeavoring to comfort her sad hour.

Yet I do not despair. Our doctrines have I made wide and rapid progress. Wherever I go I meet men who make “Progress and Poverty,” the rule and guide of their political life. Even among conservatives, not personally interested in land, there is a feeling that landlordism should be muzzled, if not shot like a mad dog. Indeed, we find more sufferers among a certain class of conservatives than we do among another of liberals. The latter are so deeply interested in their own little earthquake pills that they have no room in their pills for the vast reality of the change that has come and is coming over our social system.



And So Do Other Landlords

London Democrat

An Irish landlord does not hesitate to exact rents which can only be paid by poor servant girls sending portions of their hard earned wages to parents poorer than themselves.


Page 7

Thy Kingdom Come

O God, and still Thy children suffer want!

And haggard fathers seek from day to day

For work in vain, and babes cry for bread,

And heartsick mothers with dry eyes look on,

Too sad to weep, too hopeless far to pray,

As happy Christians do, “Thy kingdom come.”

Thy kingdom come. How often has the prayer

Gone up to Thee since Christ, the poor man's friend,

First told His humble followers how to pray.

From million houses the prayer goes up today

To thee, and still no answer dost Thou send,

Or so it seems, for want and crime are here.

And yet O Father. wherefore the delay?

Whose fault that want and crime walk hand in hand?

Whose fault but ours, for wealth enough is here.

But selfish Greed, and Ignorance, and Fear,

A band of triple tyrants, rule the land

And thwart the prayer they offer day by day.

O God! I see a home—a million homes

So poor and comfortless, bare even to tears;

Nor paint, nor carpet on the hard, rough floor;

Some chairs, a table, bed and stove, no more;

And they have lived in such a home for years,

And still the prayer goes up, “Thy kingdom come.”

And hard the father toils through long, long hours:

The mother drudges, and the children, too,

Must work to eke out the poor meager fare.

No chance for knowledge to gain entrance there;

No chance the gentler virtues there to woo,

No chance enough for all the evil powers.

And when the father drinks—the children swear,

Or steal, or worse—and bitterness and hate

Fills every heart where should be only love—

With cold philosophy free thinkers prove

'Tis law that millions dooms to such a fate;

'Tis God, the Christians say, then wherefore care?

Or wherefore vex and sadden all our years

In feeling all the woes of wretched men

Whom God has doomed to toil, and want, and sin,

That the elect, the wealthy few, may win

Leisure for wisdom. virtue, joy, and then,

At last, a place where comes not death or tears?

We do not like to hear of poverty,

That hot bed of disease, and sin, and crime,

We preach that thrift and virtue is its dower.

With yes, we see not. Have we lost the power?

Has self and greed, then, made us deaf and blind?

And made our worship worse than blasphemy?

We quote, “Ye always with you have the poor,”

And make a prophecy of what was meant

But as a statement of the facts that then

Existed. But a time in vain seek, when

The Christ or prophet in God's Bible lent

His voice to justify so curst a state.

Let us not dare to pray—giving the while

A paltry sum, degrading charity,

To those our ignorance or greed has robbed

Of justice, their divine inheritance.

And doomed them slaves when God has made them free.

Let us not dare to pray “Thy kingdom come!”

Let us not dare, till we have done our part

With voice or pen or freeman's vote to win

Them justice and to blot this deadly stain

From off our souls. Nor ignorant remain

Of all their wrongs, for ignorance is sin.

Let us not dare to harden still the heart.

For God is just. He will avenue the wrong

Done to his children by their brothers here.

The silent, voiceless agony ascends

From prisoned souls to Him in heaven, and lends

New strength to outraged laws divine.

Then fear eternal justice, sure, and swift and strong.

—Mrs. Elizabeth Johnson.

Pictou, Ont., April 13, 1887.


Mr. Tan Grips Fortune

In 1840 Mr. Van Grip purchased from the Van Snort estate a lot of land fronting on Broadway, below Fulton street, for $25,000. An old building stood on the lot at that time, and Mr. Van Grip had it t om down and a new building erected in its stead. The new building cost $100,000 and created no little stir and gossip in New York in those days. Besides giving a minute description of it in their news columns, the Bugle and Bladder treated the subject editorially and in glowing terms praised the enterprise and public spirit of Mr. Van Grip, and wound up with a wish that New York were blessed with more men like him. Enterprise and public spirit were not Mr. Van Grip's only virtues. He was a religious, God-fearing gentleman, a loving husband, a good father, a thorough business man who was not too proud to look after his own affairs, which he always kept in the straightest order, keeping accurate accounts of all his transactions so that at any moment he could tell exactly how he stood with respect to any particular one of them; in short, he was a model man—a man to be looked up to and copied.

Years rolled by, bringing poverty, hunger and rags to many and riches, plenty and fine linen to a few. The civil war broke out; and thousands of hot-headed patriots left home and kindred to sacrifice their lives on the altar of freedom. Hitherto it had been a cast iron rule with Mr. Van Grip to personally represent himself on all occasions where matters of any moment were at issue, hut in this case he was satisfied to appear by proxy. So he hired an agent to represent him at the “front” and remained at home himself to look after the interests of society and to see that the business of the metropolis was carried on in a ship-shape manner. The public weal demanded this, and, as Mr. Van Grip was a heavy taxpayer, the city could not very well spare him. He was one of her representative men.

In 1886 Mr. Van Grip died, in the language of the eminent divine who officiated at the funeral services, “universally regretted,” and was peacefully laid to rest in the family plot, where a handsome marble shaft records his many virtues for the edification of future generations.

Early in 1887 the lot of land and the building (now an old one) on Broadway were sold in partition proceedings for the snug little sum of $350,000. I have incidentally remarked above that Mr. Van Grip kept accurate accounts of all his transactions, and I here take the liberty of glancing at the accounts relative to this particular one, not to satisfy any morbid curiosity, but simply with a view of learning a lesson from the enterprise and public spirit of this exemplary gentleman.

The account is written in a neat hand, every “i” is dotted and every “t” is crossed, and it is most beautifully ruled off in red ink. On the debit side are entered payments for taxes. water rates, insurance, repairs, etc., and interest at the legal rate on the $125,000 invested; and on the credit side appear the amounts of rent received. For the first time years (1841-3) the debit and credit sides of the accounts exactly balance. During the following seven years (1814-50) the credits exceed the debits by $5,500; from 1851 to 1860 the excess of credits over debits is $11,000; from 1861 to 1870 this excess mounts up to $12,500; from 1871 to 1880 the excess mounts up to $14,000; and from 1881 to 1886, inclusive, it is $8,000; the grand total of excess of rents over and above payments for taxes, insurance, water rates, repairs, etc., and the amounts which Mr. Van Grip allowed himself for interest on the principal sum invested during the forty-six years being $51,000.

Now let us work out two little problems, one in subtraction and the other in addition. From the price at which the property was sold in 1887, namely, $350,000, deduct the cost price, namely, $125,000, and there remains $225,000, to which add $51,000, and we find that the net profit on I this little transaction was $276,000. Of course, I have not taken into consideration interest on the surplus of receipts over disbursements which accrued annually from 1844 to 1886, and of which surplus Mr. Van Grip was sufficiently enterprising and public spirited to take appropriate advantage.

Two hundred and seventy-six thousand dollars! Phew! To think of it makes my head swim. What genius! What enterprise! What public spirit! Compare this with the puny efforts of twenty pigmy contemporaries of Mr. Van Grip. Those twenty clods of humanity started in the race with him. They drudged and delved for twenty years (1840-60), and as the result of their drudging and delving averaged $525 a year per man, they all earning- during the twenty years $210,000, which these good- or-nothing fellows squandered as fast as they earned it. the war broke out and the whole twenty marched off to the "front," from which six of them returned alive to resume their drudging and delving. For the next twenty-two years (1865-86) the total amount earned by those six nobodies was $66,000, or $500 yearly a man. This they likewise spent as fast as they earned it, in riotous living and pampering of the flesh. And then those six nobodies died and were buried out of sight and into their miserable graves, whereon not as much as a wooden slake is placed to remind the passer by that such pigmies lived.

Here we have the bright example of one enterprising, public spirited gentleman, earning and saving on one of his transactions as much as twenty nobodies earned and squandered. Just think of it!

We have said one of his transactions, for this was only one of a number of like ones in which Mr. Van Grip had been engaged during those forty-six years. When that worthy gentleman died his estate was found to be worth. over $2,000,000— “all in realty,” as the lawyers expressed it. Any reader of the Standard, if he wishes to form a fair estimate of the enterprise and public spirit of this great man, can do so, approximately at least, by working out a little problem m the ride of three. For instance, suppose the earnings of Mr. Van Grip over and above those of ordinary men for those forty- ix years to form a like proportion of the $2,000,000 to that which they actually did of the $350,000, we can find out in a jiffy how much his entire earnings during that period amount to.

Let us see:

350,000 : 2,000,000 : : 276,000.

Multiply our second term by our third and divide the product by our first. There you are, sir, $1,577,142.85; that is the amount of Mr. Van Grip's extra earnings during the forty-six years.

Again, if it takes twenty nobodies under certain circumstances and conditions forty-six years to earn $276,000, how many nobodies, working under similar circumstances and conditions and for a similar period, will it take to earn $1,577,142.85?

276,000 : 1,577.142.28 : : 20.

Multiply our second term by our third and divide the product by our first. Answer 114 78857- 76000 nobodies. A fraction of a nobody does not amount to much, so we will discard the fraction and call it 114.

Gracious, goodness me, what an enterprising, public spirited man Mr. Van Grip was!

It warms the cockles of my heart to contemplate him. Just think of it. He earned and saved more than 114 of the ordinary run of men earned and squandered.

Pondering over these figures an idea occurred to me, and as I am not one of those who keep their light under a bushel, I give it to the renders of the Standard. It is this: The sole object of life nowadays is money. Granted. There are over 50,000,000 human beings in these United States at the present writing. Now, suppose that one-fifth of these are able-bodied men (which they are not, hut we will suppose so), engaged in a terribly earnest pursuit of that object, and suppose again that in every 115 of these 10,000,000 there is one Mr. Van Grip and 114 incapable nobodies. Now let us figure out that and see what it comes to:

115 : 10,000,000 : : 1 :

Proceed as we have done above and we find that there are 86,956 12-23 Mr. Van Grips and 9,913,643 11-23 incapable nobodies who are unwilling or unable to accomplish anything toward the object referred to—money.

Now I have come to the idea. Listen: Let those. 9,913,043 11-23 incapable nobodies be quietly choked, or burned, or, perhaps. it would be cheaper to dump them into the sea, and then after that has been done let us strangle all the nobody infants as fast as they appear and save and carefully raise the Van Grip infants; if—but, hang it, here comes this terrible “if!” How are we to recognize the Van Grip infants? There's the rub. Perhaps some reader of the Standard may devise a mode of obviating this little difficulty.

Some men are curious animals. I related the facts above written to my friend Pete Drudger, and instead of appreciating the enterprise and public spirit of Mr. Van Grip as they deserve, he metaphorically tore that respectable gentleman's memory to tatters, said he never did an honest day's work in his life, said he was nothing but a bloated spider who lay idly in his hole, and watched an opportunity to prey upon the poor nobodies, said that the $1,557,142.85 of right belonged to the 114 nobodies I spoke of, then branched off into some nonsense about “unearned increment,” or some such stuff, and finally wound up by calling me a fool, and said that if my “idiotic idea” about burning, choking and drowning could, by any possible means, be carried into execution, I should. be the first victim, as he had never known a more incapable nobody than I am; whereupon I left him. There is no use in trying to reason with such men.

Owen Fitzsimons


Wealth Without Work

Seizing What God Meant For All Men's Use and Growing Rich by Selling It

Philadelphia, Times.

The career of the Willetts brothers smacks of the romantic. For years they followed the number business in Allegheny county, New York, clearing a tract of land left them by their father, one of the pioneers of that section. In 1870 they were worth perhaps $50,000 apiece and 2,000 acres of fallow land. The developments of the Allegheny field showed that the land was in the heart of the belt. Refusing all offers to lease they developed in person what proved a genuine gold mine. Charles Young, who had formerly been in their employ and had purchased a portion of their land and turned farmer, was also surprised to find himself a rich man. Not content with their first success all three have been following up developments ever since, and have been uniformly successful, ranking among the several times millionaires of oildom.

At the same time that Isaac Willetts purchased the Munce farm John McKeown purchased the farm of the Munce heirs directly north. The venture has proved a most fortunate one, and Mr. McKeowirs income there from now amount to nearly $2,000 a day. The career of this gentleman has been even more varied and romantic than that of the Willetts brothers. Less than twenty five years ago he landed at Castle garden, an Irish immigrant with scarcely a dollar in his pocket. He tried his hands at various things, but finally drifted into the oil regions and became a driller. His first ventures on his own account were failures, and on several occasions he saw his all swept into the hands of the sheriff. But after each reverse he went to  work with renewed energy to recover what he had lost, and when the Bradford field was opened his fortunes changed. He was early in the field, and secured some choice leases. He sold one, and with the proceeds developed the remainder. A year later he was a millionaire, and his wealth was constantly increasing. That was eleven years ago. Since then he has played a leaning role in the development of every new field, and his losing ventures have been few and far between. Today he has millions invested in bonds, owns one of the most extensive ranches in Colorado and is rated by the trade as the largest single oil producer in the world.

Captain J. J. Vandegrift of the Standard oil company leased the Barre farm, south of the Smith, and struck a series of gushers that added materially to his immense wealth. He disposed of his interest in the Barre only to develop the Taylorstown pool, where he now has another fortune in prospect South of the Barre farm lies a three-acre lot, the property of a man named Stewart, who gained a living by the manufacture and sale of a salve warranted to cure all ills. Two years ago Stewart's lot and house would have sold for less than $500. In March of last year he leased the lot, only large enough for one well, to Joseph Craig for one-fourth royalty. The result was a well that for weeks did over two thousand barrels a day and is still a strong producer. Stewart has purchased a farm and permanently retired from the salve trade. Craig's interest in the Washington field have thus far netted him $500,000. Adjoining the Stewart lot was another, still smaller, the property of “Mammy” Miller, an aged colored woman. This was leased by a couple of Washington merchants with comfortable bank accounts, who drilled a well that for months had a daily production of over one thousand barrels. Its owners have more than trebled their investment and “Mammy” Miller is the most popular member of her race in Washington county. F. B. Hallam and J. N. Edgerly, two young business men of Washington, leased the Davis farm when the field was in its infancy, but for some unknown reason destroyed the lease. Davis then leased it to the Union oil company. The farm is now valued at $400,000 and the original lessees have sued Davis for $100,000 damages and the recovery of their rights.

R. H. Thayer went a mile in advance of developments in a southwesterly direction, and struck three or four good wells and one gusher that, for a time, netted him an income of $2,000 a day. Pat Gailigan, an old-timer, who drilled the Smith well, leased and developed the Taylor farm, and is growing rich. The Washington natural gas company, a local organization, has cleared £200,000, Pew & Emerson, whose joint possessions fifteen years ago would not have amounted to £1,000, but who have since made millions by their operations in natural gas, leased the Manifold farm, to the west of the Smith. Their first well, *"or a time, gave them a monthly income of $20,000, and their subsequent "ventures have repeated, in varying degree, this initial success.


Propagating the Faith in England

The English land restoration league, which, as the title indicates, advocates the restoration of the land of England to the whole people of England, is busily propagating the faith by means of lectures and the distribution of tracts.. The following is taken from one of their tracts:

Organizer of co-operative guild—Well what can you do?

Blacksmith—I can make springs and axles for carriages, and shoe your horses.

Organizer—Come in, Mr. Blacksmith.

Mason—I can build your barns, bridges, houses and stables.

Organizer—Very well, come in; we cannot do without you.

Shoemaker—I can make boots and shoes for you.

Organizer—We must have you, Mr. Shoemaker.

[In turn all the trades and professions applied, till at last a landlord came who wanted to become a member.]

Organizer—And what are you?

Landlord—I am a landlord.

Organizer—What do you do for a livelihood/

Landlord—Oh, I take toll of all of you. The laborer pays me for the right to dig, the miner for the right to burrow in the earth, and the bricklayer for permission to build a house.

Organizer—But what can you do?

Landlord—I can make your laws, and when I have made them I can administer them. If a man snares a hare I give him six months; if he shoots a snipe I give him three. I can drive men to desperation, and to the uttermost part of the earth. I can prevent the erection of cottages, or the building of a Methodist chapel. I can look on and take the larger share of the prosperity of the farmer, the shopkeeper and the manufacturer.

Organizer—And what else can you do?

Landlord—I can bring the gray hairs of the aged to the grave with sorrow; I can break the heart of the wife and blast the prospects of men of talent and enterprise.

Organizer—Is that all you can do?

Landlord—Good heavens! is not that enough?


Of Course He Must Be Crazy

George Francis Train to Evening Sun reporter.

“Omaha? Yes. I saw that was the place for a city of millions. I jumped ashore and found a hat lying in the road. Nothing else there. Now there is a city. I owned half of it once. Do you know how people live? Ten own everything and ninety own nothing. I saw if I held that land I would be one of the ten. I didn't want to swim with ninety men on my back. I said,'Take your city; I don't want it,' and left them to do as they pleased. Now I sit here, and it costs we only a dollar a day to live.”


Unemployed Labor

From “Social Problems,” Chapter XIII.

Consider this terrible phenomenon, the tramp—an appearance more menacing to the republic than that of hostile armies and fleets bent on destruction. What is the tramp? In the beginning, he is a man able to work, and willing to work, for the satisfaction of his needs; but who, not finding opportunity to work where he is, starts out in quest of it; who, failing in this search, is, in a later stage, driven by those imperative needs to beg or to steal, and so, losing- self-respect, loses all that animates and elevates and stimulates a man to struggle and to labor; becomes a vagabond and an outcast—a poisonous pariah, avenging on society the wrong that he keenly, but vaguely, feels has been done him by society.

Yet the tramp, known as he is now from the Atlantic to the Pacific, is only a part of the phenomenon. Behind him, though not obtrusive, save in what we call “hard times,” there is, even in what we now consider normal tunes, a great mass of unemployed labor which is unable, unwilling, or not yet forced to tramp, but which bears to the tramp the same relation that the submerged part of an iceberg does to that much smaller part which shows above the surface.

The difficulty which so many men who would gladly work to satisfy their needs find in obtaining opportunity to do so, is so common as to occasion no surprise; nor, save when it becomes particularly intensified, to arouse any inquiry. We tire so used to it that, although we all know that work is in itself distasteful, and that there never yet was a human being who wanted work for the sake of work, we have got into the habit of thinking and talking as though work were in itself a boon. So deeply is this idea implanted in the common mind that we maintain a policy based on the notion that the more work we do for foreign nations and the less we allow them to do for us, the better off we shall be; and in public and in private we hear men lauded and enterprises advocated because they “furnish employment,” while there are many who, with more or less definiteness, hold the idea that labor saving inventions have operated injuriously by lessening the amount of work to be done.

Manifestly, work is not an end, but a means; manifestly, there can be no real scarcity of work, which is but the means of satisfying material wants, until human wants are all satisfied. How, then, shall we explain the obvious facts that lead men to think and speak as though work were in itself desirable?

When we consider that labor is the producer of all wealth, the creator of ail values, is it not strange that labor should experience difficulty in finding employment? The exchange for commodities of that which gives value to all commodities ought to be the most certain and easy of exchanges. One wishing to exchange labor for food or clothing, or any of the manifold things which labor produces, is like one wishing to exchange gold dust for coin, cotton for cloth, or wheat for flour. Nay, this is hardly a parallel; for, as the terms upon which the exchange of labor for commodities takes place are usually that the labor is first rendered, the man who offers labor in exchange generally proposes to produce and render value before value is returned to him.

This being the case, why is not the competition of employers to obtain workmen as great as the competition of workmen to find employment. Why is it that we do not consider the man who does work as the obliging party rat her than the man who, as we say, furnishes work?

So it, necessarily would be, if in saying that laborer's the producer of wealth, we stated the whole case. But labor is only the producer of wealth in the scuse of being the active factor of production. For the production of wealth labor must have access to preexisting substance and natural forces. Man has no power to bring something out of nothing. He cannot create an atom of matter or initiate the slightest motion. Vast as are his powers of modifying matter and utilizing force, they are merely powers of adapting, changing, recombining, what previously exists. The substance of the hand with which I write these lines, as of the paper on which I write, has previously formed the substance of other men and other animals, of plants, soils, atmospheres, probably of other worlds and other systems. And so of the force which impels my pen. All we know of it is that it has acted and reacted through what seem to us eternal circlings, and appears to reach this planet from the sun. The destruction of matter and motion, as the creation of matter and motion, are to us unthinkable.

In the human being, in some mysterious way which neither the researches of physiologists nor the speculations of philosophers enable us to comprehend, conscious, planning intelligence comes into control, for a limited time and to a limited extent, of the matter and motion contained in the human frame. The power of contracting and expanding human muscles is the initial force with which the human mind acts upon the material world. By the use of this power other powers are. Utilized, and the forms and relations of matter are changed in accordance with human desire. But how great soever be the power of affecting and using external nature which human intelligence thus obtains—and how great this may be we are only beginning now to realize—it is still only the power of affecting and using what previously exists. Without access to external nature, without the power of availing himself of her substance and forces, man is not merely powerless lo produce anything, he ceases to exist in the material work. He himself, in physical body at least, is but a changing form of matter, a passing mode of motion, that must be continually drawn from the reservoirs of external nature.

Without either of the three element: land, air and water, man could not exist; but he is peculiarly a land animal, living on its surface and drawing from it his supplies. Though he is able to navigate the ocean, and may some may be able to navigate the air, he can only do so by availing himself of materials drawn from land. Land is to him the great storehouse of materials and reservoir of forces upon which he must draw for his needs. And as wealth consists of materials and products of nature which have been secured or modified by human exertion so as to lit them for the satisfaction of human desires(1), labor is the active factor in the production of wealth, but land is the passive factor, without which labor can neither produce nor exist.

All this is so obvious that it may seem like wasting space to state it. Yet, in this obvious fact lies the explanation of that enigma that to so many seems a hopeless puzzle—the labor question. What is inexplicable, if we lose sight of man's absolute and constant dependence upon land, is clear v/hen we recognize it.

Let us suppose, as well as we can, human society in a world as near as possible like our own, with one essential difference. Let us suppose this imaginary world and its inhabitants so constructed that men could support themselves in air, and could from the material of the air produce by their labor what they needed for nourishment and use. I do not mean to suppose a state of things in which men might float around like birds in the air or fishes in the ocean, supplying the prime necessities of animal life from what they could pick up. I am merely trying to suppose a state of things in which men as they are were relieved of absolute dependence upon land for a standing place and reservoir of material and forces. We will suppose labor to be as necessary as with us, human desires to be as boundless as with us, the cumulative power of labor to give to capital as much advantage as with us. and the division of labor to have gone as far as with us—the only difference being (the idea of claiming the air as private property not having been thought of), that no human creature would be compelled to make terms with another in order to get a resting place, and to obtain access to the materials and forces without which labor cannot produce. In such a state of things, no matter how minute had become the division of labor, no matter how great had become the accumulation of capital, or how far labor saving inventions had been carried, there could never be anything that seemed like an excess of the supply of labor over the demand for labor; there could never be any difficulty in finding employment: and the spectacle of willing men, having in their own brains and muscles the power of supplying the needs of themselves and their families, yet compelled to beg for work or for alms. could never be witnessed. It being in the power of every one able to labor to apply his labor directly to the satisfaction of his needs without asking leave of any one else, that cut throat competition, in which men who must find employment or starve are forced to bid against each other, could never arise.

Variations there might be in the demand for particular commodities or services, which would produce variations in the demand for labor in different occupations, and cause wages in those occupations to somewhat rise above or fall below the general level, but the ability of labor to employ itself. the freedom of indefinite expansion in the primary employments, would allow labor to accommodate itself to these variations, not merely without loss or suffering, but so easily that they would be scarcely noticed. For occupations shade into one another by imperceptible degrees, no matter how minute the division of labor—or, rather, the more minute the division of labor the more insensible the gradation—so that there are in each occupation enough who could easily pass to other occupations, to readily allow of such contractions and expansions as might in a state of freedom occur. The accessibility of indefinite expansion in the primary occupations, the ability of every one to make a living by resort to them, would produce elasticity throughout the whole industrial system.

Under such conditions capital could not oppress labor. At present, in any dispute between capital and labor. capital enjoys the enormous advantage of being better able to wait. Capital wastes when not employed; but labor starves. Where, however, labor could always employ itself, the disadvantage in any conflict would be on the side of capital, while that surplus of unemployed labor which enables capital to make such advantageous bargains with labor would not exist. The man who wanted to get others to work for him would not find men crowding for employment, but finding all labor already employed, would have to offer higher wages, in order to tempt them into his employment, than the men he wanted could make for themselves. The competition would be that of employers to obtain workmen, rather than that of workmen to get employment, and thus the advantages which the accumulation of capital gives in the production of wealth would (save enough to secure the accumulation and employment of capital) go ultimately to labor. In such a state of things, instead of thinking that the man who employed another was doing him a favor, we would rather look upon the man who went to work for another as the obliging party.

To suppose that under such conditions there could be such inequality in the distribution of wealth as we now see, would require a more violent presumption than we have made in supposing air, instead of land. to be the element from which wealth is chiefly derived. But supposing existing inequalities to be translated into such a state, it is evident that large fortunes could avail little and continue but a short time. Where there is always labor seeking employment on any terms; where the masses earn only a bare living, and dismissal from employment means anxiety and privation, and even beggary or starvation, these large fortunes have monstrous power. But in a condition of things where  there was no unemployed labor, where every one could make a living for himself and family without fear or favor, what could a hundred or live hundred millions avail in the way of enabling its possessor to extort or tyrannize?

The upper millstone alone cannot grind. That it may do so the nether mi list one as well is needed. No amount of force will break an eggshell if exerted on one side alone. So capital could not squeeze labor as long as labor was free to natural opportunities; and in a world where these natural materials and opportunities were as free to all as is the air to us, there could be no difficulty in finding employment, no willing hands conjoined with hungry stomachs, no tendency of wages toward the minimum on which the worker could barely live. In such a world we would no more think of thanking anybody for furnishing us employment than we here think of thanking anybody for furnishing us with appetites.

That the Creator might have put us in the kind of world I have sought to imagine, as readily as in this kind of a world, I have no doubt. Why He has not done so may, however, I think, be seen. That kind of a world would be best for fools. This is the best for men who will use the intelligence with which they have been gifted. Of this, however, I shall speak hereafter. What I am now trying  to do by asking my renders to endeavor to imagine a world in which natural opportunities were as “free as air,” is to show that the barriers which prevent labor from freely using land are the nether millstone against which labor is ground, the true cause of the difficulties which are apparent through the whole industrial organization.

But it may be said, as I have often heard it said, “We do not alt want land! We cannot all become farmers!”

To this I reply that we do all want land, though it may be in different ways and in varying degrees. Without land no human being can live; without land no human occupation can be carried on. Agriculture is not the only use of land. It is only one of many. And just as the uppermost story of the tallest building rests upon land as truly as the lowest. so is the operative as truly a user of land as is the farmer. As all wealth is in the last analysis the resultant of land and labor. so is all product ion in the last analysis the expenditure of labor upon land.

Nor is it true that we could not nil become farmers. That is the one thing that we might all become. If all men were merchants, or tailors, or mechanics, all men would soon starve. But there have been, and still exist. societies in which all gel their living directly from nature. The occupations that resort directly to nature are the primitive occupations, from which, as society progresses, all others are differentiated. No matter how complex the industrial organization, those must always remain the fundamental occupations, upon which all other occupations rest. just as the upper stories of a building rest upon the foundation. Now, as ever, “the farmer feedeth all.” And necessarily, the condition of labor in these first and widest of occupations determines the general condition of labor, just as the level of the ocean determines the level of all its arms and bays and seas. Where there is a great demand for labor m agriculture, and wages are high, there must soon be a great demand for labor, and high wages in all occupations. Where it is difficult to get employment in agriculture, and wages are low, there must soon be a difficulty of obtaining employment, and low wages, in all occupations. Now, what determines the demand for labor and the rate of wages in agriculture is manifestly the ability of labor to employ itself that is to say, the ease with which land can be obtained. This is the reason that in new countries, where land is easily had, wages, not merely in agriculture, but in all occupations, are higher than in older countries where land is hard to get. And thus it is that, as the value of land increases, wages fall, and the difficulty in finding employment arises.

This whoever will may see by merely looking around him. Clearly the difficulty of finding employment, the fact that in all vocations, as a rule, the supply of labor seems to exceed the demand for labor, springs from difficulties that prevent labor finding employment for itself—from the barriers that fence labor off from land. That there is a surplus of labor in any one occupation arises from the difficulty of finding employment in other occupations, but tor which the surplus would be immediately drained off. When there was a great demand for clerks no bookkeeper could suffer for want of employment. And so on, down to the fundamental employments which directly extract wealth from land, the opening in which of opportunities for labor to employ itself would soon drain off any surplus in derivative occupations. Not that every unemployed mechanic, or operative, or clerk, could or would get himself a farm: but that from all the various occupations enough would betake themselves to the land to relieve any pressure for employment.


Industry Rewarded

How Some People Manage to Earn Other People's Money

Correspondence New York Sun.

Wichita, Kan., April 13.—Old Henry Wiggins is now a familiar sight on the streets of Wichita. He sports a diamond as big as his thumb nail, wears a watch chain that weighs a pound, and has several pairs of gorgeously checked and striped trousers. He used to be in the employ of a St. Louis furniture house and once or twice a year made a trip through various frontier towns for the purpose of  drumming up business. In Wichita he sold a bill of goods to a fly-by-night firm, and as security for the note given accepted a mortgage on sixty acres of land lying about a mile and a quarter west of the town. In the course of time it was discovered that the furniture dealers had sold their struck and left the country, and old Henry's employers then became convinced that he had shown very poor financiering in taking a mortgage on property which “wasn't worth a quarter as much as the furniture be had sold.”

Times being rather hard just then, and the St. Louisans coming to the conclusion that Henry had survived his usefulness, they discharged him, and surrendered to him the mortgage in lien of some back pay which was due him. The old man objected to this settlement at first, but rather than have any trouble he finally con curred in it, and naturally drifted to Wichita, where in the course of time he bought in the land at mortgage sale, and went to work at $20 a month in a grocery store, his idea being that as soon as he could raise a little money he would build him a house, get married and go to fanning. When the boom struck the town Henry smiled and wailed. The speculators had a dozen railroads, two or three rolling mills, an orphan asylum, a cathedral and several stock yards built on paper in his section, and though prices were tempting, he “held for a rise.” Two months ago he sold out clean, and he says has $10,000 in bank.

“I don't look it, I know,” he observed to a friend the other day, “but it's a fact. I have sent to Chicago for the biggest and best watch chain charm in town. and when I get it I'm going down to St. Louis to call on the folks. I like that $40,000 pretty well, but I would rather give up the whole of it than lose the chance of dropping in on the fellows I used to work for.”

Another true story is that of a young fellow who hails from Massachusetts. He had been a wild boy tit home, and after many scrapes had been shipped to the west to shift for himself. For a time he lounged about Chicago. Then he proceeded to Kansas City, where he got into trouble and was forced to call on his parents for money. This was given him with some reluctance, arid with the assurance that it was the last time that his demands would ever be honored. Making the acquaintance of a man who was coming here, the youth accompanied him and obtained employment in a saloon. Losing this job he lived from hand to mouth for a time, sending a begging letter home about once a week, in response to his appeals came sad but firm: refusals, a father's stern reprimands, and a mother's appeals for his reformation, and agonizing references to her own helplessness.

For a few months this correspondence ceased, and then the young man wrote a cheerful sort of letter to his father detailing his improved circumstances, describing how he had obtained a paying position, but as the man that he was working for had advanced him money and board at various times, he would not get any salary for some time, and saying that if he would send him $l00 he could make his fortune in a land deal. Probably no letter that ever went out of Wichita contained a more glowing description of the place and its possibilities. But the old people down in Massachusetts knew the boy, and the father's reply was a dignified epistle, expressing pleasure at his promised reformation and horror at the feel that in the same breath his son had not only shown his fondness for gambling, but had sought to inveigle his old father into the snap.

Before this letter was received the young man had managed to raise $100 by giving pointers to  a crowd of Kansas City speculators, who wanted just such assistance as he who was familiar with the ground and with the people could give them, and with that sum he had bought an option on a tract of land in the city limits, which in less than three months he had sold at a profit of $1,500. His interest in a few deals by Kansas City parties paid him handsomely, and he now has one of the leading real estate offices here, and he is a director in half a dozen stock companies of more or less magnitude. The funny thing about it is that he sent his father a draft for $150 a few weeks ago and invited the old gentleman out here, and he came, too, and as a result will move his family to Wichita and grow up with the boom.


Page 8


The United Labor Party

Activity and Energy in the Work of Organization

Thursday. April 14.— The Fifth district club had an entertainment at their hall, corner Spring and Clarke streets, the piece de resistance being a lecture on “Living Issues,” by Professor H. Spencer. The following ladies and gentlemen among others, were present, Mr. Edward A. Brown. Thomas Hillman, the Hisses Schonorn. Mrs. I. Hawkins, Frank F. Cassidy, Miss Nora O'Reilly and Mr. Skelley. A business meeting will take place on Thursday, the 21st; inst.

The Seventh met at their hall, South Fifth avenue and West Fourth street. Two deaths of members of the club were reported—Erastus Doolittle, the vice chairman. and Michael J. Kelly, a member of the executive committee. About thirty new members signed the rolls, and the same number were proposed for membership. A member reported that the system of nomination candidates for office proposed by the Seventh district had been adopted by the Ninth. and resolutions complimentary to Walt Whitman, the poet, were adopted. The hypercritics took tip the most of the session.

The Eighth district turned from the dull routine of daily lite and labor politics for one night to take part in the pleasures of the dance at Walhalla hall. The married men brought their wives and children, and the young men brought their sweethearts. A speech was interjected- during the evening, which was listened to with patience, but when dancing was resumed the young folks seemed to enjoy it much more after the somewhat long rest secured them by the efforts of the speaker. Last election day this district made a good record from Stanton street to Grand; but below the latter street is a snag that can only be got over by financial means. However, the members hope one of these days to overcome that difficulty legitimately. The political club is officered by Harry E. Richards, president; Charles Freutel, vice chairman; M. Blaschko, recording secretary; Sam Lavner, financial secretary; Sam Majower, treasurer: J. Waldron, sergeant at arms. The following were the officers in charge of the ball: Floor manager, Charles Barnat; assistant floor manager, P. McMahon; floor committee, Harry Meisel {chairman), Charles Freutel, Emil Blehl, Sam Lavner, William Stein; reception committee, Harry Richards (chairman). Sam Blum, Adolf Jablinowski, Joseph Franks. William Zick, Morris Lewis, H. Cotton, John Blum, S. Cohen; arrangement committee, M. Blascliko (chairman), S. Majower, S. Faber, Fred. Lesber, Win. Fisher, Henry Bord, Chas. Rajewski.

The regular meeting of the Seventeenth district was held at 747 2finth avenue, with James Magee in the chair. The committee in charge of the recent McGlynn mass meeting reported. Resolutions were adopted condemning Senator Plunkitt for his opposition to various labor measures.

The men of the Eighteenth were in high feather. They met for the first time in their permanent headquarters, 161 East Thirty-second street, near Third avenue, second floor. These rooms will be open every evening, except Sunday, in future, for the entertainment of members of the club and their friends. The painter members of the club are going to paint and fresco the interior of the rooms, and other members are going to carpet and furnish them up. After these things are done Secretary Carson says the club will have what he calls a “blow out,” to which all friends will be invited, provided they wear clawhammers and gloves. The reports from the election districts showed that all were thoroughly organized. This district “will be carried by the united labor party next November. John McMackin was chosen to represent the district in the executive committee of the county in place of Philip Kelly, resigned.

The Twenty-third district class on political economy met at 197 Third avenue. The subject was, “Comparison of socialism with the theories of Henry George.” There was considerable debate, and the vote taken at the close showed that the audience considered the theories of Henry George the most scientific as well as the most practical.

The Nineteenth district club elected officers as follows: W. B. O'Meara, chairman; first vice- chairman, William Anderson; second vice-chairman, William Ryan; recording secretary. Charles H. Mitchell; corresponding secretary, Charles Fring; financial secret, Julius Schluter; treasurer, John McKinney; trustees, George Asheton Black, S. B. Warner and Patrick Dempsey. The permanent headquarters of the club are at Denbert's hall, corner St. Nicholas and Eighth avenues.

Friday, April 15.—The committee on calling a state convention met at Room 28, Cooper union; present, Jeremiah Murphy, Augustus A. Levey, Matthew Barr, Henry Emrich, John McMackin and William McCabe. The sub-committee appointed at the previous meeting to prepare a circular letter to send out, reported progress. The Second district club met at 33 New Bowery. Routine business was done only.

Saturday, April 10. The Fourth districtclub met at 68 East Broadway, and completed all arrangements for their entertainment at the Windsor theatre.

The Sixteenth district club held a special meeting to complete arrangements for the Dr. McGlynn mass meeting, which will be held at Clarendon hall, Wednesday evening, May 4 . Stands will be placed in Thirteenth street for speakers to address the overflow. The citizens of the Fourteenth in sympathy with the object of the meeting will join in with the Sixteenth, as there is no hall in the former district to hold a mass meeting.

A number of enthusiastic believers in the doctrine of the common right to l a u d met in Thayer s hall, Bedford and Fulton avenues, Brooklyn, to consider means of spreading the doctrine of land reform. George Klingler called the meeting to order, and V. A. Wildes was chosen chairman. A temporary organization was formed, and speeches were made by James P . Kohler and several other gentlemen. Another meeting will take place on Saturday, April 30, when a permanent organization will be formed, to be known as a “Land and labor club.”

Sunday, April 17.—Henry George lectured at the Windsor theater for the benefit of the Fourth assembly district club of the united labor party. A report of the lecture has been given by the daily press.

Monday, April 18.—The committee appointed to arrange for a state convention met at room 28, Cooper Union. The general committee of Kings county sent a sub-committee to assist in the work inaugurated by their New York brethren. A circular letter was prepared and agreed to, which will be given to the public by the end of the week.

The Twentieth district club met at 105S Second avenue and transacted routine business. J. H. Koenig was elected recording secretary. Next Monday Mr. Corson will deliver a lecture on “Industry vs. Monopoly.”

The Twenty-second held a special meeting at Moser's hall, 1422 Second avenue. The delegates to the general committee were instructed to insist upon the executive committee making full reports of their proceedings to the general body in executive session. The club is organizing the election districts.

The Twenty-third district club (English branch) held their usual weekly meeting. A committee was appointed to commence the work of organizing the election districts. A special call for next Monday's meeting will he sent out, so as to hasten the work of election district organization.

The entertainment and ball of the Twenty-first assembly district was held at Adelphia hall. Everything passed off pleasantly. The officers of the club are: William Cummings, chairman; John J. Francis, vice chairman; John J. O'Brien, recording secretary; John Kelly, financial secretary; Richard D. Hill, treasurer: Jeremiah Deady, servant at arms.

Tuesday, April 19.— The Third district club met at their headquarters, 42 Great Jones street. The attendance was fair, and but little beyond routine business transacted. The club is proceeding with election district organization.

Tho Washington association (shoemakers) gave an entertainment and ball at Turn hall, Fourth street, for the benefit of those members of the organization now on strike. The entertainment, taken as a whole, was very good. The features were John Williams, bone solo, and Campbell's Irish impersonations. At 12 o-clock the floor was cleared and dancing began. The attendance was very large.

Wednesday, April 20.—The Sixth assembly district held an agitation mass meeting at 412 Grand street, which was largely attended. James Crossen presided. The speakers were James Dougherty of the Sixth, Dr. Gottheil of the Twenty-first, Dr. Coughlin of the Fourth and William McCabe of the Fourteenth. A feature of the addresses were that no attempt was made to make points in the usual spread eagle campaign style. The arguments were philosophical, and appealed to the Citizens' love for their families and humanity. “The politicians cannot understand,” said Dr. Coughlin, “how it is, when no election is at hand, that men will come together at meetings to discuss political matters. These politicians do not know, perhaps, that this is a social as well as a political movement—that principles, not boodle, are discussed. As the days go by the political labor movement seems to become more intense. We are gaining strength every day. With organization we will sweep this county in the next election.” The speeches were respectfully listened to, and the verdict of the meeting was that it was a success, and would do a great deal to strengthen tho united labor party in the Sixth district. Two gentlemen present announced that they had voted for Hewitt in the last election, but now that the truth had burst upon them through reading the Standard they would, if forgiven for the grievous sin they committed last November, do for the club any hard work they might be asked to do in the interest of the united labor party.

The meetings for the coming week are: Thursday, April 21—Fifth, Warren hall; Eighteenth, 101 East Thirty-second street; Twenty-third (lecture), 1897 Third avenue. Friday, April 22—Eighth, 153 Forsyth; Ninth, lecture by Erastus Potter at Cooper Union. Saturday, April 23—Fourth, OS East Broadway; Second, 32 New Bowery; Roslyn benevolent association (ball and entertainment), Harmony hall, Essex street. Monday, April Twentieth. 1058 Second avenue; Twenty-third, 1807 Third avenue. Tuesday, April 20—Third, 42 Great Jones street. Wednesday, April 27—Sixth, 412 Grand street.

Secretary Barnes of the central committee, 28 Cooper Union, sends us the following brief extracts from recent correspondence:

W. H. Van Ornum, Chicago, Ill.—We propose as a means of spreading the doctrine of a single tax on land values to organize land and labor libraries and to form classes in political economy for the discussion of the subject in all its bearings. We propose that these libraries shall contain all of Mr. George's works, and we can also use large quantities of tracts. We shall sell the books to those wishing to purchase, loan them to those who do not, and distribute the tracts gratuitously. We hope to arrange with small shop keepers to take charge of and be responsible for these libraries. We think they will not only be self-supporting, but that we can add to the number of them all over the city. I do not see why this library plan could not be worked to advantage all over the state, even in the country school districts. We are going to discuss “Progress and Poverty” chapter by chapter.

John J. Bealin writes from Port Jervis, under date of April 19: “I was in Middletown last night. The men at the head of the movement there are of the right sort and most earnest land reformers. The Rev. Mr. Winchester is heart and soul in our movement. I had men everywhere warmly in favor of the proposed state convention.”

J. F. Busche, Jr., Workmen's Advocate, New Haven, Conn.—Great preparations are being made for Dr. McGlynn's lecture on the 6th of May. He will have a great audience, great in numbers and great in intelligence.

P. V. Jones, Lakeland, Fla.—I think that every man who comprehends the virtue of the proposed land tax owes it to his fellowmen to do all he can to propagate this doctrine. I shall try to form a club in this county.

V. A. Wilder, chairman general committee united labor party, Kings county.—The two cities are but one in sentiment in this great movement. The success we have achieved in Brooklyn was stimulated by the magnificent work in Now York, and in turn the results of our work will cheer the men of New York to renowned efforts. As to the state convention, the organization in Brooklyn is very much in favor of it. I have declared plainly where I stand on the land question, and we are in complete sympathy with you.

The central committee has appointed Warren Worth Bailey of the Vincennes News, who has been for years devoted to land reform, to be state Organizer for Indiana. Mr. Bailey has already begun the publication of a land and labor library of his own.

Chairman McMackin and Mr. John J. Bealin are again absent on an organizing tour through New York state.

Dr. McGlynn will deliver his lecture on “The Cross of a New Crusade” in the Academy of Music, Brooklyn, on Wednesday evening, April 27, under the auspices of the united labor party of Kings county. Other immediate engagements are in the Academy of Music, Philadelphia, on Wednesday, May 4; at Carroll's Opera house, New Haven, for the town committee of the labor party, on Friday, May 6, and in Boston on May 8, where he will speak for the United Irish societies.


A Unitarian Clergyman Joins The Ranks

Rev. John B. Barnhill Expresses Strong Sentiment on the Doctrine that God Made the Land for All of His Creatures

Meadville, Pa., April 16.—Anxious to enroll myself under the banner of the “new crusade,” I take great pleasure in assuring you of the strong and general sympathy enlisted for your views and  proposed methods of social amelioration in the Unitarian theological school located at this place, and of which I am a member. We all recognize that the advocacy of those principles is the cause of that enthusiasm for humanity and for humanity's future which was the essence of Christ's spirit, and must be made the essence of Christianity and its teachings.

John B. Barnhill.



Austin Dimmitt of Clinton, Mo., says he has long noticed the inequalities in the distribution of wealth and recognizes in the agitation of the land question a means toward the end of assuring to every man the result of his labor. “The whole disorder.” says he, “is a moral question founded on the eternal principle of right between man and man.” The disregard of this principle is the prime cause of all social disorders.


Why Englishmen Emigrate

The Causes That Operate to Drive Them Out of England—Plenty of Room at Home if They Could Only Use It

London Paper.

Is there any need of emigration—or have we in reality any surplus population? What the rich are accustomed to call surplus population are people who are unable to find work. There never was a greater fallacy put forth than this. Every man carries about with him the capital, in the shape of bone, sinew and intelligence, that will support himself and a wife and family if needful. It is not his fault that that capital cannot find a productive outlet. There are millions of acres of land lying waste in what is called our over-peopled country—millions of tons of coal and iron stone reposing in tho bowels of the earth. In a word, there is the country labor enough and money enough to procure bread enough and to spare for, not only our thirty-six millions of population, but also for thirty times six millions, if only it were properly applied and distributed. But how is this to be effected without revolution? Very easily. The landlords; for example, receive each year about ten million pounds for what is called royalty on minerals. They have no more right to this money than the people of Titubuctoo. Let then a law be passed that this money shall henceforth go to the state. The ten millions would pay a ninth of our national taxation. Again, the Church of England a lone, not to speak of the Church of Scotland, has property valued at £200,000,000, the proceeds of which, estimated at about £11,000,000 annually, are devoted exclusively to the maintenance of an idle and useless priesthood. This property is the property of the people, and ought to be taken possession of by them. Once more, the unearned movement in both town and county, which is swallowed up annually by the aristocracy, amounts to hundreds of millions. They toil not, neither do they spin, for a single penny of it, and have, therefore, no moral right to it. It belongs to the people, and ought of right to be enjoyed by the people. Herein lies the only true remedy for poverty, and for what is called surplus population. Colonial conferences, bills for state-aided emigration, Mansion house schemes, dwellings of the poor commissioners, etc., are mere makeshifts, or at most stop gaps. There is no need for emigration. What is wanted is migration and proper distribution of national wealth and of nature's resources. Parliament, in a word, could, in a single sitting, remedy the ills from which the poor are suffering; but it will not—and why? Simply because its actions are controlled by the aristocracy and the wealthy.


Wise Australia!

She Owns Her Railways, and Means to Own Her Irrigation Works as Well

Adelaide, South Australia, Register.

There is a strong feeling that a vigorous policy of irrigation is essential for South Australia, and that the future policy in this respect should be definitely settled. The conclusion is forced upon us that South Australia should deal with this question from a national point of view. This is the policy which we desire to recommend for consideration: That all headworks for irrigation should be, like the railways, national property. Who would advocate at the present day the sale of the railways to foreign capitalist companies? By such an act the colony might free itself from its indebtedness. But it would in so doing sell its very birthright in to the hands of strangers, and fasten upon itself all the abuses with which the monopoly-ridden people of England and America are struggling in vain. The railways are national property—heavily mortgaged, no doubt, but still the property—of the people, and managed by their representatives. In fact, what the colony requires is an irrigation policy very nearly analogous to that which has directed its construction of railways. South Australia need have no fear of borrowing for tho purpose of constructing headworks for irrigation. Such works, which exist in many places, are undoubtedly to be reckoned among the most profitable on the face of the globe: and there is not the slightest reason to believe that in this country the conditions are reversed.

(          1)           However great; be its utility, nothing can he

               counted as wealth unless It requires labor for its production;

               nor however much labor bas been required for

               its production, can anything retain the character

            wealth longer than it can gratify desire.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Leave a reply

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>