The Labor enquirer., 1884-02-09
Into the Origin Of the Condition
Of Society Which Per-
mits
The Rich to Monopolize all the
Benefits and Beauties of
Society.
And Why Do the Rich Get Richer
and the Poor Continually
Poorer2 T
Workers and Idlers.

workers ana lQlers.
~.
1t then becomes pertinent and impor-
tant to inquire into the origin of this
condition of society; to know by what
rights the rich monopolize all the bene-
fits and beauties of life, and leave to the
poor the drudgeries and the miseries
and why is it that society seems inevita-
bly, to drift into this condition of unequal
distribution and whether this is FEM
edy for it. For we cannot conscientiously
call ourselves an enlightened people if
we remain longer ignorant upon this
question and we should not call our
selves civilized or human if we should
remain inactive after a remedy shall
have been found.
On first thought, it would seem that
the remedy would be simple and easy !,
that the blessings and burdens of life
need only be properly divided; that he
who has too much should yield up all
but his proper share and he who has
less than his share should have it made
up to him.
But if this were put in practice, and an
equal distribution made, it would not
remedy the difficulty for we would soon
find that the shrewder or more fortunate
were again getting more than their share
of the blessings and carrying less than
their share of the burdens and that the
indolent and unfortunate were again get
ting less than their share of the burdens.
And, in the course of time, the condition
of unequal distribution would be re-
sumed.
A second per capita distribution would
be equally as inefficient to remedy the
evil as the first. And besides, the lazy
and indolent would in time be- encour.
aged in their shiftlessness by the fact
tkat they would get their shares without
working for them while the industrious
and frugal would be discouraged from
working and saving because the fruits of
their labor would be taken from them
and distributed among the whole COM
munity; and society would soon suffer
for want of the absolute necessaries of
life.
And it will not do to say that the one
class deserves to be rich, and the
other class deserve to be poor; for that
would bring us no remedy. We are now
seeking reason and a remedy for the
misery of the world. And we must take
it as fact that, if men are left alone,
under the present system, owing to the
different capacities and traits, and the
difference in their surroundings, there
will eventually be an unequal distrlbu-
ton of wealth. And it is also true that,
as society grows older, the rich contlnu-
ally get richer and the poor get poorer,
until the equilibrium of society is de-
stroyed, and the bad results before stated
are attained.
1t has also been suggested that the
property of rich man should be taken
at his death by the government; and that
this would prevent the growth of inn
mense fortunes. But such law could
scarcely be called just; and could. be
easily evaded by the rich man disposing
of his property before death, or secreting
it SO that his heirs, and no one else, could
find it. To enforce such law, there
would be required an inquisitorial sys-
of government which no free people
would tolerate. And, too, the world
would soon be full of people whose sole
occupation would be waiting for rich
people to die.
1t has also been insisted that the state,
instead of the landlords, should collect
rent from landed property; in other
words, that rent should be "confscated
by the state" This system would
scarcely accomplish the result desired.
nor even change the present condition.
The state already owns the land by right
of eminent domain; and practically
leases it from year to year; for no one
can hold land who does not pay yearly
rent or tax to the state. If he fails to
pay, he is ousted, and the land goes to
some one else who will pay more
promptly.
This new system proposes to leave the
present owners in possession, with the
same rights as at present, except the
payment of tax equivalent to the pres
ent tax and the rent combined There
is no suggestion that the man who owns
large tract of land, a part of which he
may now rent, would be prevented from
exercising his right over all his land to
cultivate it himself or permit others to
cultivate it. 1t is not proposed that the
tenant shall be allowed to remain in pos
session of the land which he has hereto
fore rented, without first obtaining per-
mission from the owner; for that would
be practically robbing the owner, and
giving the land to the tenant. The land
lord or owner would still have the right
to say whether he should use the land
himself or let others use it. And if he
shall let the tenant use the land upon
barely paying the double tax, or tax and