New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-03-09
4 WORD UT1H LABOR REFORMERS.


Strang-came of age nearly at the same time.
They were then worth exactly the clothes
they stood in-say 500 each-but had about
average intellects, fair constitutions, good
health, a decent common school education, and
q tolerable knowledge of ordinary Framework.
They soon hired ont for Sl5 per month each,
with board and washing and were accounted
good hands. NOkes saved his hours and his
earnings, spending nothing for indulgences;
Strang took day out now and then, drank
and smoked and danced, as most men Will,
resolved to "live as he goes along" AT the
years end, each had more and better clothing
than at the outset but NOkes had 300 in cash laid
by, with ten dollars in his pocket, while Strang
had three or four in his pocket and nothing
put aside "for o rairy day." They now hired
again. at a little better wages, and so on; Strang
marrying at 90, and thencefOrth being con-
strained to closer calculation and greater econ
omy, whereby, what with cares and children,
he Just kept and keeps his chin above water;
while Nokes, marrying at q, had $1,000 draw
ing interest, beside enough in hand to buy
what he must TO fit up frugal home. Twenty
years later, NOkes has good farm, well
| stocked, with 1000 at interest and every COM
| fort about him, so that he is considered worth
! $4,000, and at length begins to take the world
more easily; while Strang, the same man he
ever was, has accumulated half dozen chill
dren and their duds but very little else. You
| can find Just such men as each of these (but
more like Strang than like Nokes) in almost
any rural township, i'll any village or ward.
| In fact, mankind may fairly be divided into a
small class of NOkcses and one much larger Of
Strangs.
Now the difference in these mems estates
was not made by banks, or tariffs, or char
tiers, or monopOlies, or anything of the kind.
Any of these or all of them may have helped
NOkes or hindered him, as you will; but the
groundwork of his success was in himself;
and so with Strang's comparative failure.
We know that bad government may discourage
thrift and so reduce the proportion OF the
thrifty; but it has pleased God to endOw some
men with the instinct of saving, which others
are born without: so the former amass wealth
and the lattST do not. So it was from the be-
ginning; so it will be, unless human nature
changes, to the end of time. We are not ar
guing that NOkes is wiser or better man
than Strang. That is not the point. What we
deem unconsidered and unrcaized by the ma
jority is this: 1t is the interest Of all, including
The poorest that there should be more and more
men Ike Nohes and feCer Ike Strang
NOkes, You say, is selfish and purse
proud ne makes money his god and misses
the good of life in order to scrape together
wealth which he does not enjoy. and from
which his children will derive no real benefit.
Well ADM. it. But mankind are richer for
the wealth he has created and saved his fam.
L. wi hn iaft IN n oh
he be taken away. Nay, more: from the hour
he became capitalist he ceased to be COM
petitor for employment and became a pro-
wider of employment for those who, but for
his rise, might have sought it III vain. To
make his home what it is, he has bought
thousands of days labor from ditchers, stone
pickcrs, fence makers, muck-diggers, &C., &C.;
the construction of his better house has made
work for cellar-diggers, brick makers, masOns,
lumbermeD, carpenters, fuInishers, &c, &C.;
he has thus without intending it, if you say
SOY been benefactOr to labor; and nine
tenths of the wealth he has amassed will re-
main to benefit others after he has done with
it, Had all been like NOkes. the most luckless
among us would have been born to a more
desirable lot in life than is actually enjoyed
by quarter of us.
1t does seem to us that these elemental
truths are not duly considered. Too many
seem to regard the tirecss worker and frugal
saver as though he were public enemy. Too
many talk and act as though thrift were pre-
sumptive evidence of wrong-that, because
some get rich by extOrtiOn and rascality none
acquire wealth in any other way. Hence pro-
iects which seem calculated to reduce Labor
to a minimum and fix brand upon all who
work hard that they may bequeath comfort
and opportunity to their children. 1t seems
clear to us that not only is this mistaken, bnt
that the class who would suffer most, if all
were hcnceforth to eschew saving and live for
the passing day, would be the needy poor.