The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1896-08-09
THE EAST AND WEST.
Comparative Statements as to
Growth of the Two Sections.
THE WEST AHEAD or THE EAST.
The Error IN saying That tho East Has
Slapped All the Wealth and Left
the West Poor.

ures USED cy senator TEIlnaan In an article
prepared by him and printed in the New
YORK World OF the 7sh inst Our co-re-
spondent asks us 20 point osat the rnix.ead-
ing character OF the statistics AMI 10 show
Tue inaccuracies and falaelss they EN-
body.
We nave learnt from experiences no. 70
place very high value on statements
MADE oy Tsilman. and we had supposed
mat The estimate of the general public IN
tnls respect accorded pretty we1 with our
own. Therefore. except tor our correspon-
dents letter. we should not have consid-
cred u worth white 10 examine critically
the article referred 70. But as our CORE
spondent states that the article has been
extensively copied BY other papers. with
out any reply that can be considered at
al adequate" and thinks we can perform
public service by directing attention TO
the errors 4 contains. NE feel called upon
70 comply with his request. and in IN.
Following shall endeavor--as briefly as the
circumstances Of the ease viii permit-so
analyzs the figures and statements given
IN the article
Humans purpose ~ to establish an argsl-
inert against the gold standard by making
II appear that single Eastern states. ike
New York, Massachusetts, ard Pennsyi-
vania, though having smaller population
and very much smaller area, gained
sAtAN Ia KY III wealth. GUft1Z ire census
period from fsS9 TO 1880 than whole tiers OF
states In the West and South. with a vast
~ greater area and heavier population
From this apparent disproportion in the
wealth Accommodations OF these sections he
then deduees rhs inference that under the
gold standard the East IS rroitlng at the
expense OF the South ana West. and that
free silver coinage Is necessary 10 take
away from the East such advantage and
restore the equilibrium.
He states the object he has in view at
the very beginning by starting out as fol-
lows: ITO exhibit how unbalanced our
interests are becoming through the local
Accommodations OF wealth and the DON'T
neering power OF our affairs exercised by
concentrated capital, let US examine some
startling facts disclosed by the general
census OF 1seo." We shall see as we pro-
coed that there Is something ''unhal-
anced." but that the term would more ap-
propriately refer TO Tfliman's article than
In the way he seeks TO apply the word.
Following the opening paragraph. which
We have quoted. he gives small outline
map, or diagram. comparing the area OF
Pennsylvania with that Of the Southern
states-all except Texas He takes pains
to state that the figures ARE drawn TO a
scale correctly showing the relative size
OF the two territories" OF course Penn
sylvania looks very insignificant alongside
the combined area OF the whole South, and
that was the purpose In introducing the
diagram-to furnish a graphic contrast de-
plotting the insirnificance OF the Keystone
state in area. After stating that the four
teen Southern states grouped together
have an area Of So. 545 square miles and by
the census az 1880 had a population OF IT,
303 o;4 while the state OF Pennsylvania
has an area OF only 5.2lS square miles and
had a population in 1890 OF 52sS.elf. and
that the assessed value OF property in the
Southern group in 1880 was s.. COZ Sos. OIL
while that Of Pennsylvania was only
81 .ss3. $50 oi5-after stating these facts he
goes on 10 show that in view OF such ad-
vantages the Southern group ought 70
have gained many times as much in
wealth during the decade as the state of
Pennsylvania. but that as a matter OF fact
the actual addition in the whole fourteen
states was only 1901. 47a. 81. while the add
ton in Pennsylvania was sa09. 0l6. the
latter having thus gained more than the
entire group Of states mentioned.
These comparisons certainly look start
ling" and their significance IL not lessened
when they are accompanied by the state
nnent, 10 which no one viii be inclined 20
take exception. that ''the mineral re-
sources and natural advantages OF some
% the states are equal 70 those Of Penn
sylvania; in agricultural products some OF
them are greatly superior 20 Pennsylva-
MA"
But are the figures. as given. accurate.
and do they reflect correctly the accumu-
latlons OF wealth IN the sections COM
pared7 The results are based on the as
! sessed values and we shall presently show
that these furnish no true or reliable In
dication Of the actual or relative additions
IN values IN different sections. Rut. dis
regarding that point for the moment, the
figures even on the basis OF assessed val
ues DO not agree with the latest official
data As the South Carolina senator
speaks OF the facts disclosed BY the GEN.
sus, his data are evidently intended TO be
based on some compilations coming from
the census office, We have ali the census
publications and we have gone TO con-
siderable trouble 10 make up the aggre-
gates In the same way as those given by
| him. bat excep; in the case Of the valus-
ton OF PENNSYLVANIA for $50 We cannot
make our results accord with his. HerA
are the comparisons as reached by US. TAX
ing the census reports as a basis. We ind
from the figures OF area and population
given by TYliman that ne has not included
the District OF Columbia in his totals, and
we therefore follow the same plan.
Assessed vaIue OF Real and Personal
Property.
fsel Issa Inrresse
Penn. 81 $50. 7ss eos 81 ess sssois ~, $3.50
Tex g.. 3.s7G2R.s41 2s74lsa.iss I.sn. rsi. ss7
Texas. 7s0.sa -,6a5 s1a.Ns.5iS 4eo,assea