St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-05-28

hO VI t0OVL CAPCCto W ulOhC
profit from the labor of those working
for him, and must do so il his business
be successful. In the strict sense capital
does not employ labor; but it Is labor
which employees capital and makes il
productive. There could be no capital
until laber was expended and created 1t.
The assumption that it is from the store
of the employer that the workman gets
his wages is fallaciOus. II the workman
did not render to the employer greater
value than his wages, and that III AL
vance of receiving his wages, the en-
ployer of labor could not continue busi-
ness. still less make profit.
Labor existed prior to capital, and by
its eXertions called capital into being.
Can the creator, then, be in bondage to
its creature? BY no means. The claim
is preposterOus; it is absurd; it is an in
suit to the Intelligence of the American
wage Garner. Were all the works of
man suddenl y destioyed-were all cap
ital effaced from off the face of the
earth-would mankind sit supinely
down and starve to death because there
was no capital to give" it employ
ment? No. indeed. 1t would apply its
labor to the bounties of nature and
create anew capital TO aid it in the work
Vi plouuCtlUll. LC 1NNSON IioG iaOOi 10
today apparently in bondage TO capital
is because it is denied access to these
bOuntieS of nature.
What is capital, and what are its
functions? Capital is the savings of
labor employed productivity. All cap
ital is wealth, but all wealth is not
capital, though it may generally be
eXch lnged for capital. All the products
of labor not employed III business or in
the production of wealth should think,
be defined as wealth. For instance, a
mans dwelling, household furniture.
wearing apparel, etc., would be CLASH
fed as wealth, While his law library.
office furniture, ETC., used in his bust
ness, would be capital The function of
capital Is to facilitate the production of
the exertions OF labor. Land and
labor are the primary factors
III the production of wealth.
Capital is evolved by the application of
labor to land, and is valuable aid in
the production of wealth. 1t is, how.
ever. of secondary Importance, and can
always be produced by labor when it
has access to the land. Capital is not es-
Sential to the employment of labor, but
without access to land labor cannot be
employed. Labor has no quarrel with
capital, as is so frequently asserted.
Its fight is against monopoly and spe-
cial privileges. Wages are drawn from
the products of labor. In reality, labor
to labor. The increase of capital rep
1esents the residue of the products of
labor, after labor has received its por-
ton in the shape of wages.
A few years ago l was employed in a
large establishment whose main stock
holders were successful editor and an
acute business manager. beth we'll
known throughout the country. One
day. during the noon hour, the foreman
in the department where l was at work
started a discussion as to the respective
merits of the two gentlemen. Joe is
smart man and good writer" said he,
but he don't know anything about
business. ~Where'd he be without Fred?
Nowhere. Fred knows the value of
dollar-he's all business-and tell you,
Joe owes all he is to him." just then
one Of my fellow worknen spoke up and
said: Where would both of them
be if it hadn't been for us
fellows?" This sally brought the dis
cussion to an abrupt ending; but it
started train of thought in the mind
of at least one of the auditors-the
writer of these lines.
No. fellow wOrkmen, we must not
permit ourselves to be placed in the at
titude OF dependents to capital. We
are the creators of capital. We are the
rightful rulers. We are the salt of the
earth. We are numerically largely in
the majority. If we do not achieve our
Industrial independence and assume
our rightful position in the social edi-
fee, it is only because we lack man
hood, because we are uninteiligent, be-
cause we will not study these economic
questions.
How preposterous the claim that the
prosperity of the country depends upon
a protective tariff, as constantly put
forth by Mckinley and politicians of
his ik. have been making living as a
wage Garner for over thirty years. Dur
ing all of that time we have had high
protective tariff. Yet during those
thirty years | nave seen the gulf be-
tween the rich and the poor constantly
widening. At no time has it been
claimed that labor was getting its fair
share of the wealth produced. These
have been years of industrial strife and
revolt-mostly in the protected INDUS
tries. The signs of opulence and
splendor visible twenty-five years
ago were few and insignificant
compared with what we see nowadays.
MiliionaireS were scarce then-and SO
were tramps. Trusts were unknown in
those days, and SO were multi-million-
aires. Surely. protection has been
given ample trial, and proven dismal
failure.
A short time ago stepped into one OF
our leading grocery stores to make a
purchase. The proprietor engaged me
in conversation, talking about the pre-
vailing topic-the hard times. Among
other things, he said to me: "If this
country keeps OH advancing toward free
trade, you'll soon be working for Z
cents a day." "Oho," said l, ''howlcan
that be? Don't you know that
this country less than 100000
are in the protected industries? You
and |, Mr.. Groceryman, are among the
| latter number. How in the world, then,
| is it possible for q protective tariff to
benefit us-assuming, purely for the
| sake of argument, that it does benefit
| anybody? And, besides. what right has
! the government to aid any one in his
| private business? II you don't know
| how to run your grocery store without
| the assistance of government,youo ought
| step down and out and give way to
| some one who can. or course. under
| any circumstances, you wouldn't expect
| government TO come along and give you
| a monopoly OF the grocery bust.
! ness in st. Paul by preventing
shipments of groceries into the
city. or in any other way. You know
| you must stand OH your own bottom
and depend for success upon your own
skill and knowledge of the business
Aud so must l. Now, why should you
want the government to extend special
privileges to other business men-piiyi-
leges which you would neither desire
nor ask for yourself? Can't you see
what humbug this scheme OF prolec-
ton is, when it claims to benefit indus
try in general? Come, now, think it
over, and be honest" Tine merchant
assentea to much OF what l saba has
never talked protection to me since.
AS | have before stated, the whole
theory of "protection" is that the well
fare of the laborer is best subserved by
| leaving him as a chattei in the hands of