The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1902-06-30

Rev. DR.. I. j. Lansing delivered
a thoughtful and careful address
last night at the Green Ridge Presby-
terian church, upon the subject, THE
Capitalist-Does He Rob or Raise the
Workman" In the course Of the adj
dress Dr. Lansing emphasized the fact
that the term capitalist" Is often mis-
construed, and argued that much of the
prejudice against wealth Is only the
outgrOwth of envy and discomfort.
He chose his text from st. Luke, xii:-
1921, which begins: Take heed and be-
ware of covetousness, for a mans life
consisteth not in the abundance of the
things he possesseth."
mot long ago." said DR.. Lansing, "a
prominent infidel of this country. In
talking of the first parable Of this pass
age, said that this plainly teaches that
Christianity Is opposed to the accumu-
lation of wealth. BY such a statement
he laid himself open to a charge of de-
ficiency in understanding. for the point
is that man blessed with n great suf-
f1ciency of property is expected to not
use 1t for himself alone. No blame ac-
crues to him, merely on account of the
possession of wealth. 1t is one of the
greatest mistakes of human life to sup
pose man advantaged by what he has.
The advantage only lies in the use he
makes of his possessions. The basis Of
life is personal character.
ATTITUDE TOWARD CAPITAL.
"There are many kinds of attitude in
this country towards capital and capi-
talists. You will hear the fiercest at
tacks made upon them, you will hear
that capital Is crime. that the capital
lists are robbers, that the capitalistic
press is false. These things are being
continually echoed in the ears of men.
Did you notice last week in our
papers that a platform had been an
nounced by party calling itself the
Socialist party, and that in this plat
form they had taken the very attitude
I have mentioned?" DR.. Lansing here
read extracts from the platform in
question, in which some rather severe
terms We're used regarding the money!
ed classes.
You will find those sentiments
stated and restated in hundreds of diff
ferent forms. in every city of this
country" DR.. Lansing resumed. "How-
ever, to infer that all rich men are bad
is the widest kind of inference. 1t may
also be said that there are companies
or corporations. in which the individual
man does not figure, in which the en-
ployes may not be treated as we'll as
they should be. Some such cases may
be found, but yet it is true that in
the majority of cases the men are
treated fairly and squarely by the men
making up the corporation
=,
the exact meaning of the word 'capi-
talist." and showed how wealth and
capital must not necessarily go to-
gether, according to the real definition
of the word. However," said he.
"there is a great outcry at present
against the employers, as class.
Some men, in fact, insist that our
whole system of wage-earning is
wrong. I will not enter into an intri-
cate discussion with the latter, but
surely 1t can not be wrong to hire men.
The entire question seems to me to
finally devolve into this: An antagon-
ism against the rich. as rich. and
protest that they should not be.
A SLIDING SCALE.
Nov, if a radical change We're to be
made, we would first have to define
riches. and the standard for wealth is
sliding scale. different in different
cities, according to their size and ex-
listing conditions. 1t might be said that
the prejudice Is against men who
have acquired riches dishonesty. But
who Is going to decide whether or not
they have been honestly acquired. And
who Is going to take the ill-gotten
gains away from them, and how can it
be done. without effecting greater
wrongs? And, granted that we could
take it away. who would have it?
NOW, as a matter of fact, If all the
richest men of this country should set
out some morning and try to divide
their wealth equally with all the peo-
pie of the world, they would probably
be unable to do so. Why? Because it
would be an impossibility, and as such
is evidently contrary to the Divine
wish.
Another standpoint is that men
SHOULD not have so much for them
selves. when others have nothing. That
Is right, and l believe that the men
who are abundantly favored with this
worlds goods should be contributors to
the general welfare. But there is
misconception of wealth. When we
consider it carefully, we can see that
not only the rich themselves, but count
less others derive good from their
riches.
1T may be said that the rich live
extravagantly, but even in that, adj
vantage may be found. If they have a
host of retainers. are not the latter
surely we'll paid for their services?
There Is always an outlet for the
wealth of the rich. Last year the peo-
pie who possess more than their fellows
gave away over seventy-five millions
of dollars for public gifts, such as
libraries training schools and the like.
Look at the hundreds of thousands
given employment, and / believe that
there is no better way of serving man
than by giving fair pay to those who
return fair service. And, therefore, 1t
seems to me that the whole outcry
against capital is wild outcry, not
founded on the heart principles. or on
good sound sense, and the continual
fierce plant made against those who
have wealth is born chiefly from envy"