Willmar tribune. [volume] (Willmar, Minn.) 1895-1931, 1904-07-27

Men have somehow become classified
with regard to the amount of their
worldly possessions, and are judged
not by what they are but in accord
ance with the amount Of property they
possess. We no longer see the man,
but we see his bank account and We
allow ourselves to be and our judg-
ment biased by the glitter of his gold.
If our neighbor, who is rich in world.
ly possessions, does something that
he ought not to do, We do not dare
tell him what we think of his actions,
nor do we dare to correct him. In
stead, we tell another neighbo,'. That
neighbor has perhaps the same feel
ipgs as we, but he also does not dare
say anything. We perhaps agree
perfectly that our erring neighbor
should be taken to task and his faults
corrected, but the next time the worthy
gentleman comes within speaking dis
lance, we vie with each other in show
ing him courtesies. Now if the poor
err neighbor who has done something
he should not have done, do we act
in the same way toward him? Need
We ask the question at all? Do we
not too often hurry to see who can
cast the first stone? Why make this
distinction? Does wealth make one
man better than the other? Is not one
as good as the other as long as he is
upright and honest?. The Lord made
the occupant of the hut as we'll as the
dweller in the palace, and the noblest
of hearts may beat beneath q ragged
coat. Surely it would be better to
open wide the gates of the universe
and let the rich and the poor go thru
together, like the brothers that God
made them to be.
Another very undesirable quality
in society Of the present day, is dis
honesty. AS long as a person can
live in luxury and cheat as many as
he can without being punished, he is
"smart." His conduct comes under
the code of so called "business eth
ics," and he is by common consent
exempt from all ordinary moral obli-
cations. To him is granted the right
to trample his weaker neighbor under
foot, and to rob him of what he has
by legal processes, while the world
looks on and applauds the skill and
energy with which he carries out his
plans of spoliation and ruin. Who
of Us stops to pity the victims? But
perhaps we do disapprove of these
things and loudly condemn them when
they are done by others. But just
wait till we ourselves, or some of our
friends do something just as bad.
Then we are at once ready to explain
that what we did was not at all the
same thing. We hide behind the
time worn excuses, that "circumstan-
ces alter cases." and that "every man
must look to himself first" We
make less and less insistent dema nds
upon ourselves and our neighbors,
and lull our consciences to sleep until
We lose that high sense of honor
which ought to be mans most precious
possession. In fact things have come
to such pass that it is said that
competition is not a struggle for
existence but consists simply in See
ing how much one can force from so.
ciety into his Own pockets. This may
be true of the capitalist but it is as
yet hardly true of the latorer. For,
what more does the laborer get than
his daily wages, which are barely
enough to support him? And yet the
laboring man belongs to the class
that produces the wealth of the world.
How is it that he does not have more
of it? Why is it that he must be con-
tent to go thru life earning bare
living, and too often living his life
not only in want but even in con-
tempt? How often do we not hear the
expression, "He is only q common
laborer"? If we omitted the word
"only" this sentence would be more
correct. What then does the word
"only" signify? In the first place,
being only q common laborer, he
does not generally have an education;
then, he is not known TO possess a
very large amount of this world 3
goods, and for the greater part Of the
time we fud him in shabby clothing.
Therefore we, altho we think our
selves educated, are igro enough
to think that che can not amount to
much,' as we say. Hence our use OF
the word "only." We should remem
Ter that ut is not always the Goa,
that tells, nor the collar our neighbor
may wear; it is not only the shine OF
his shoe, nor the finished touch OF his
hair.' What Is it then? Let Us in
stead OF looking at the outward man,
look TO the inner man and there find
our answer. And, II we think our.
selves so much superior to the labor.
ing man, let us, instead of exposing
our ignorance, try to bring him up to
our level; for OF all the classes OF So
cietV the labOring man Is the most