Litchfield enquirer., 1880-03-11

THE WEALTH OF NEW YoRK-Tt is impos- sible not to be struck by the great wealth and luxury displayed both in it's public and in its private buildings. It has been a common place to speak of the growth of luxury in the Old World, and of the increasing separation between the rich and poor. It is often said that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer l have always doubted the fact. The increase of wealth in recent years in England and in Europe generally has been mainly, believe, an increase in the number Of moderate incomes and an increase in the wages of labor. But if the common saying is at all true anywhere, should say that the ap- pearances of it arc most conspicuous in such city as New York. Costly and ostentatious houses are far more common than in London. Shops for the sale of luxuries are on an enor1 nous scale. doubt if there exists anywhere ill London, or in any capital of the Old World, such an establishment as that of Tiffany, in New York, for the sale of jewelry and other articles of great cost. It is an establishment, too it must be added, not more remarkable for it's enormous extent than for the admirable taste of it's designs Other stores on sini- lar scale, for the sale of women's attire, indi- cate the scale on which luxurious expenditure prevails among the richer classes of America. And it must be so. The growing wealth of America is founded on the secure possession of every element which can yield boundless returns, not only to industry, but, above all, to capital shrewdly used. In the Old World those who gain great profits are accustomed to look to the future, and not to think only of the present. They seek investments which W iil be permanent record of their success, and be, lasting infiuence in the society to which they belong. They bny an estate,H they build cot tages, they drain and reclaim land. In the New World this incentive to saving does not exist. Fortunes are expended as rapidly as they are made. A few indiyiduals of great public spirit found or endow public instltu- tions, or become Inuhificent supporters of scientific research. But such persons are, and always must be, very small minority. Tine tendency of things is to lavish expenditure and, to luxurious living. I am not now arguing as to which of the two systems is the better. One great moralist of the last century has said in celebrated passage that. "whatever makes the past, the distant, or the future predominate over the present advances ns in the dignity of thinking being. T" But many political bhiloso- phers do not except this doctrine, ard are ieall ous of the wealth or, of the distinctions which may be gained by individuals in one generation surviving in another Whetfler this jealousy be good or bad, it is certain that laws or GUS
 toms which are inspired by it tend to the quicker dissipation rather than to the more equal distribution of wealth. New York has all the appearance of being one of the most luxurious cities in the world, while the discon-, tent of the working classes is often propitiated.
 if may believe the general consensus of my American friends, by tolerating heavy taxation
 which these classes impose, but to whicn they do not contribute. and by an expenditure of the funds so raised in manner which is gen. erally extravagant and very often corrupt. - Duke of Argyll, in FrGssers Magazine. jTsi {
 A Vermont hunter refrained from firing at