The advocate., 1894-10-31

who compose the mass. Laws which open
the door to large fortunes by devise, by
inheritance or by speculation have no tend.
ENJOY topromOte the happiness Of the peo-
pie at large and often not even the hap
piness Of those for whose benefit they are
made
Why is 1t that the wealth of the coun-
try, ample for the comfort and happiness
of all, is rapidly accommodating in the
hands of few? 1t Is perhaps partly due
to modern inventions which have taken
the place Of manual labor and enabled one
man, by means Of capital and machinery,
to do the work of many, thus leaving the
country filled with laborers, but unable to
find employment, and giving to capitalists
who are able to purchase machinery the
opportunity from the surplus Of laborers
to employ them at their own prices.
Rights of Man Are Superior.
But it is chiefly the laws Of property
which have enabled the few to accumulate
vast wealth while the masses live in pow
erty. For many generations our laws have
been framed with view to the claims OF
property rather than the rights Of man.
For ages the money power has controlled
legislation the world over, and, am
sorry to say, has exercised controlling In
fuence in our own land for many years.
In the language of the Declaration Of In
dependence, IAN men are created equal
and endowed by their Creator with certain
inalienable rights; that among these are
life, liberty and the pursuit Of happiness. "
If man has an inalienable right to life,
then he has q right to the means which
sustain life and of which he cannot be
Justly deprived by laws which permit one
man OF set of men to so absorb the means
of life as not to leave sufficient to sustain
the lives Of all. If man has an inalienable
right to liberty, then he cannot be justly
deprived Of liberty by another who as
sumes the right at his mere discretion to
abridge 1t. If man has an inalienable right
to the pursuit of happiness, then he can
not be justly deprived Of that right by
laws interpOsed in the way of its pursuit.
Do such laws existp And, If so, how
came they into existOnce9
In Great Britain, whence we have de-
rived most OF our laws OF property the
policy Is to build up great estates. Hence
by the laws of that country land descends
10 the eldest son, to the exclusion Of ths
other children. The effect OF this Is to
limit the ownership Of land to few per-
sons. Thirty four persons in that country
own 6, 6,211, 900 acres Of land. The Duke OF
Sutherland Is said to own 1858, 900 acres,
and few other dukes and earls own q
great proportion Of the land Of the United
Kingdom. What has brought about this
wide difference in the ownership of lands
Certainly the few who own the millions
Of acres, from which they derive revenue
In some instances of more than $500, 00O
annually in rentals, have not earned these
vast estates by their own industry; but, on
the contrary, 1t Is by force of statutory en-
actments that these vast estates have been
accumulated and perpetuated in few
hands.
Vast wealth Of q Few Families.
In this country we have abolished tn.
laws Of primogeniture, by which the eld
est son inherited the landed estate Of his
ancestor, but here vast estates are being
rapidly accumulated in few hands, and
this Is especially true during and since the
war of the rebellion. In 1860 there were
few milllonaires and few large fortunes In
this country, but since then rich olas:
has sprung up, so that in 1890, according
to reliable statistics, per cent OF the peo
pie own as much wealth as the other 9G
per cent, In 1890 there were 10. 600, 49,
families In the United States and accord
ing to George X. Holmes, in The Pollt
ical Science Quarterly, 4,047 OF these pos
sessed seven tenths Of the wealth. Just
think of it-one family possessing the
wealth of 1900 families In the country
overl In the city of New York alone there
are said to be five men whose aggregated
wealth exceeds $500, 900, 900. How many
hundred millions are held by variou;
| rzaalkhu nnrnnra klnns--nnal and oil sYnli