The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1889-10-09
Is Injury n Crime 2

Our esteemed contemporary, the Boston
Herald, asks the above question, and
answers it with q decided negative. The
Herald's argument is not an original one,
but ii is neatly put, and is calculated TO
have a very soothing effect upon the
minds OF the fortunate (or unfortunate p
children OF luxury Eat which ii is par
ticularly dedicated"
We are told that "the people who are
in moderate circumstances and the very
poor look upon the people who have ac-
cumulated great fortunes in this country,
and are living in luxury, as those who
not only have more than their share Of
the good things Of life, but are at least in
a wrong position toward Con and man,
because they either have acquired great
wealth by their own exertions or have had
it thrust upon them" Also, thatwe have
reached such stage OF material develop
ment that luxury is certain to exist among
us, whether the people like il or not; that
with wealth goes power, always has and
always will and that it is very wicked
TO say or do anything that tends TO excite
prejudices against the rich; 10 raise an
tagonisms between the two extremes of
the community, or to obliterate the dis
lance that separates these extremes. ave
must learn" says the Herald, again, that
society tolerates differences OF position, +"
and once more that "the distinctions Of
rich and poor are inevitable and unerad-
icable." And then we are solemnly as
sured that the erich man has n right TO
his property" and touse it as he likes; and
that, rs a matter OF fact, the rich are, as a
rule, very charitable with their money,
and by their benefactions make the lives
OF their poorer neighbors endurable.
Most of this strikes US as very poor
stuff. There is, from first to last beg
ging of the whole question at issue. The
rapidly increasing popular impotence
with the very rich is not an
outgrowth of the theory that prop
erty ia a crime. No one who is not
a crank believes that But it is based
upon the conviction that great fortunes
are crimes. because they do not represent
personal services rendered by their pos
SCISSORS to society. That a man should be
fully protected in the enjoyment OF all
that be can earn, or produce; in the
fruits of his industry legitimately APP
piled, however large they may be; in
everything for which he gives qtid pro
quo to the world, all will agree who do not
desire to overturn the very foundations OF
civilization. But what society is restless
about is the fact that the great fortunes
stand for so many great wrongs against
the people. The hundred millions of the
AsToRs are due to the monopolization by
one man of natural opportunities that
belonged to all alike. JAY GoULo's hun
dred millions were winnings with loaded
dice. GOULD gave no more to
society in exchange for this stipend
Gus fortune than the house-breaker
gives for his plumber. The Mackey and
Fair millions are products of the same
social wrong as the Astor millions. The
Rockefeller millions are the usufruct of
fraud, perjury, arson, bribery and other
violations of the laws of GoD and man.
And so on down the list of the great for
tunes.
II is when the owners-or rather the
possessors-of these giant fortunes faunt
their luxury in the faces of the poor that
the social structure is threatened. The
poor man is reading mere than he used
to; he is writing more, and be is thinking
n great deal more. He is great majority
and he is at last beginning to realize that
fact. lie has themaking OF laws, and the Gre