National Republican., 1886-10-23

II was the same legislature That pa ed 10
The credit Of the Cummun school fund the
proceeds Of tile state tobacco warehouse
situated IN 81. Louis aud ordered to be
SOLD. II was The same legislature which
enlarged the school fund by giving II the
proceeds Of Cscheats, unclaimed dlvi lends
or shares IN the cstat' of deceased persons,
and ell tie fines, penalties, aud forfctures
accruing to the state, and which re- e-enlcted
the long lapsed provision givlng25 per cent.
OF the net revenue OF the st9te to the
public schools aud the University OF Mis-.
souri, Under these circumstances, com.
mon fairness should have dictated TO our
friends the immodesty OF claiming for the
Democratic party credit which is due to
another.
INCREASE OF WEALTH AND POPULATION IN
MISSOURI.
Mr.. Vest, In his public speeches, finds es-
pecial cause Of pride that under Democratic
rule the increase of population in Missouri
from 1870 to 1850 was in excess of the in
crease In Ohio, Indiana, or illinois, lie
say the percentage of increase In popula-
tion during this decade was 25.07 per cent.
II the senator had been as careful to eX-
anime the rate OF increase between 1860 and
1910, he would have found that the rate was
1862 per cent. This increase is the more
creditable to the Republican administra-
tions Of the state, because II occurred during
period OF civil war, and while more than
two.thirds of the people for five years were
under arms. II Senator Vest desires in
good faith to draw a comparison between
Missouri and Illinois, or to institute paral.
lcls between states governed by the two po-
litical parties OF this nation, the same cen
sus from which he drew his figures fur
nishls abundant material for the work.
Illinois and Missouri, he admits, COM
menCCd their careers almost together. When
they were admitted into the Union the pop.
ulatiOn Of Missouri was grentcr than that
Cf Illinois In 1890 Illinois had a popua.
tion of only 55lG2. Missouri then mad a
population Of G6 j57. In 1880 Illinois was
only slightly IN the lead In 1850 Illinois
bad population Of 3,O71,s7l, while that Of
Missouri was ., l6S..SO, or nearly l,OOD,OOO
behind. Why is Missouri thus outstrpped?
Her soil and climate are equal think su
perior--tO those of Illinois. Illinois has an
area Of only 5G,CIO square miles, while Mis-
eouri has 90 AS square miles Of territory.
In other words Missouri has an area sulli-
CieUt to receive within its boundaries illi-
nois, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, aud Del
aware, and still have 1,liO square miles to
spare.
In 1885 Illinois had IA, COS miles Of oper-
uted railroad, while Missouri had $500 miles
Of operated lines. The total investment of
Missouri railroads is 1865 1868, l3l, while
The gross earnings Of the Illinois roads in
1888 were S06.23l 54S, while those Of Mis-
sCur were S366I3 $40. The dividends paid
on Illinois roads were $l6,0jG, 7O6, an on
Missouri roads SO 81 ,i3S, or about one.ffth
tlose Of the Illinois incs
The census of 1850 showed that In that
| year Illinois had in cultivation, or under
system Of farming, 80, 402,3i3 acres Of land,
| worth 81 ,009, ,594,5S0, while Missouri had
| 2S,l77,090 acres of land in farms worth only
| S3I5, 5,633, ,3O1-showing that the average
value OF farm lands in Illinois is $3l.l6 per
| acre, while In Missouri the same sort OF lands
under the same equable climate commands
on an average only 1898 per acre.
If we turn to manufacturing industries
| we find that Illinois In 1850 paid out In
| wages to operatives S51,420, ,0S5, while Mis-
souri, paid out S2i 300 ,716. Illinois paid for
raw material $3.50, ,S2G,007, while Missouri
| paid SllO69S, ,392. The gross products of
manufactures in Illinois were worth $4l4,-
| sG4,G73 while those Of Missouri were worth
only Sl65, ,3s4,005.
The same census shows that the true val
uatlon OF all property in Missouri in 1880
| was 81 53O,0O0,0O0, while that of Illinois
was 5000, 100000, or more than double
| that Of our own state.
| The per capita wealth Of Missourians in.
| 1850 was S1O6, while that of the people of
| Illinois was $l,005.
And now, when state that the gross an.
| nual revenue collected for state purposes in
| Illinois barely exceeds that collected in
| Missouri for the same purpose, thereby
making the burdens of taxation bear more
| lightly by half in the former than In the
latter, think the comparison instituted by
| Senator Vest is rather unfortunate. This
is very unpleasant duty to perform. 1t
puts one in the attitude OF depreciating his
own state. Everybody has, or ought to
| Ipttn rtni., .,f I.N.n .,
pride l am prout OF Missouri, not so
much, however, OF the past Missouri as of
the Missouri to come. She Is now on the
high road of I'M rorcment. With good
government, state and federal, she must
soon take her position with the first states
Of the Union Even bad government can
not arrest her progress or wholly prevent
the prosperity Of her people.
| The COmpuIsuns have been drawing are
not so odious when applied TO other states.
We can examine their conditions of prog
ress in asliiit Of impartiality. No sense
OF personal pride operates to exclude the
light.
Let US take two Of the original states,
commencing their careers upon nearly equal
chances Of success.
Mary land had the advantages Of climate
soil, and extent OF territory. The area oi
Mary lard Is 1890 square miles, that oi
Massachusetts, S,3l5. The population oi
| the two states was nearly the same up tC
1890, III 1850 the population Of Maryland
was 934,G43; that Of Massachusetts, waS
1.7s3 Os5, or nearly double as much. The
worth Of farming land IN Maryland is S3l 81
in Massachusetts, Si3 81 The capital in
vested In manufactures in Marvlan1 Il
S5S,i35, ,CSI; In Massachusetts, 1903, ,S06, lS5
| The annual product Of manufactures II
the former is sos, III 1893; in the latter
SG3l ,5ll ,4s4.
The total wealth of Maryland in 1880 wa.
SSG9,0O0 000: that of Massachusetts ~, ,705,
0,000-more than three times as great.
The per capita wealth OF the people o
Maryland is S929, and that Of the people o.
Massachusetts 81 ,56S.
Take North Carolina and Pennsylvania
which started in 1890 with nearly equa
population. The former has now popu
lation Of 800, $50; the latter state IN
4.2S2, sol. The former has valued wealtl
Of $44G,000,0O0; the latter, S5,393, 900, 600
The per capita wealth In North Carolina 4
, | S3l9 in Pennsylvania it is Sl,2j9. TIL
value of lands in the former Is less than $
per acre; in the latter, $i5 90. North Caro-
lima has nearly 1000 square miles more ter
ritory than Pennsylvania, with n genla
, climate and every advantage for progress
Take New York and Virginia. In l7)
, the population Of Virginia more tina
doubled that of New York. Old and Wes
, Virginia combined now have population
of 2,l3l ,O22, while New York has 5'OS9,S7l
The wealth Of the two Virginias Ia 1850 wa
$l,0O0,0 600, 600; that of New York was 81
Gl0,0OO,0C0. Farm lands in New York ar
worth $44, Al per acre, while in old VirgInl
they are worth SlO,S5, and in West Virgni
= $l302
The per capita wealth of New York
$l,4"0, OF Virginia Si5S, and OF West VII
giniu $4NG.
, The annual products Of manufactures
New York are worth $l,OS0,G3 ,GJ6; |
B Virginia, $5l $40, ,69?, and in West Virgins
S22,SG7 1876,
The annual products OF manufactures
several states arc as follows In ArIlansl
, $G, 756, l59; 10 New Hampshire, $I3,9TS, OF
1 | In Etnrrin smR ll1 4l.; In Cnnnanlirn