The herald., 1895-01-28
THE WEALTH OF NATIONS.

|
THE WEALTH OF NATIONS.
According to the census returns the
realized wealth existing in the United
States in 1890 was s65. O37. O9l. 1877 OF
$l0S6 per capita, against $43. 642. 900. OOO
in 1880, or $3.50 per capita. The total
for 1890 includes the estimated value of
vacant national lands and Indian reser-
vations. amounting to $941 .031. 1873.
which was not included in the returns
for 1880. For purposes OF comparison
this sum should be deducted from the
1880 total. making the per capita wealth
in that year about 1901.
The valuation is that of property actu :
ally in the country without regard to the
place OF ownership. As matter OF fact
considerable amount of the property
existing here ia either owned by for
eigners or subject to claims held by
them. The exact amount OF such prop
erty cannot be stated. II has been
variously estimated from $4,000. 900, 900
to So, 000, 0O0,0 900, with the possibilities
in favor OF the lower figure. The wealth
owned in the country, exclusive OF va
cant lands and Indian reservations. may
therefore be placed at about $63, ZOO, 000,-
600, or $1,000 per capita In 1890.
comparison of our wealth owned by
our own people with that OF England
and France has been attempted as
follows:
United States ......... 1858, OOO, 900, 600 $1,000
Great Britain........ $4,000, 100000 1888
france. 10000, 100000 1851
According to this comparison the
wealth owned is less in proportion to
population than in either Great Britain
or France. but the comparison may be
misleading. 1t is asserted. that "the
census figures for the United States are
30 made up as to include nothing for me-
gotiab'e securities. as in the case OF
Great Britain and France" This fact
would not yitiate the comparison if the
valuation for those countrisa did not in
clude property on which securities are
based as well as the securities, but in
formation upon that point is wanting.
The Chicago Herald. commenting on
these figures, says that the market value
OF foreign securities ought to be in
cludsd, because they represent wealth
owned in those countries but actually
vAiusInK 1l=1w n0Io. sSy~..
ties, however, either they or the prop
erty they represent should be excluded;
because if both are included the same
property is counted twice to the extent
OF the market value, or true value OF the
securities. II, then, both home securi-
ties and the property they represent are
included in the British and French valu-
atoms. it may be that our per capita
wealth is greater that theirs,
There are other reasons why the CONS
parative figures should not be accepted
without question, but it is not necessary
to state them here. The present pur-
pose is merely to point out that it is
difficult, if not impossible. to exhibit the
comparative wealth OF nations in sta.
tistical tables. Differences in prices
alone, due to tariffs and other causes,
would be sufficient to destroy the value
of statistical comparisons in the absence
of due allowance after careful and iutel-
ligent investigation.
The figures as they stand indicate
that the people OF Great Britain are
about one-third richer per capita than
the people of this country. But even ii
we accept the figures as correct they
convey little or no information as 10 the
comparative condition of the masses in
the two countries, because they do not
show how wealth is distributed. The
masses may be poorer in the country
which has the most wealth per capita.
because the property may not be go well
distributed. The testimony of men in
different occupations, who have had
personal experience and opportunity to
observe in both OF two countries COM
pared, is much surer guide to correct
conclusions than all the census stats.
tics ever compiled. Suon testimony ia
to the effect that the masses enjoy more
OF the comforts of life in this country
than elsewhere, and more in Great
Britain than in any other country ex-
cept our own.