The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1906-01-14
Men Of Great Fortunes.

He serious illness of Marshall Field has drawn
attention towards man, who, for his I'M
mense wealth. and real Importance in the business
world, is perhaps the least known of any Of the
captains of industry. In his sphere he is very
prominent and his rank among fnanciers or cap
italists, east and vest high but the public, read
ing from time to time of the doings Of the moneyed
enWho break into publicity thru gigantic schemes
of combinations or consolidation, thru manipulation
of prices in Wall street. thru the airing of family
affairs that might better remain under cover-hears
very little Of Mr. Field This is because he is
primarily merchant The growth of his fortune
has brought about identification with various inter-
ests thru investment but it as merchant that
he made his name, and he has meyer departed from
the quiet conservatism that is characteristic of the
class
It may surprise some readers to know that Mr.
Field is one Of the very richest men in America
Indeed, Harper's Weekly recently put him third in
list OF ten men whose aggregate wealth is two
billion dollars. These names were John D. Rookie
feller Andrew Carnegie Marshall Field, w. K. Van
derbilt John Jacob Aston, J. p Morgan, Russell
Sage, James ]. HILL William A. Clarke and William
Rockefeller This list may not be correct, either in
personnel or in order Of precedence. There are
OF enormous wealth who do not appear. Yet it is
probably fairly accurate.
There are three thousand men in New York city
WHO dfeErdIeu as mllllOndlTeS, some OIL WHO'LL dIo
multi-millionaires. It is roughly estimated that
five thousand men in the United States have com
bined fortunes aggregating fifteen billion dollars,
over one-ffth Of the entire national wealth.
@@fOf late there has been much discussion of the
honesty Of wealth. It is difficult to discriminate,
but the Field fortune might be picked from the list
as perhaps nearly representative Of honesty in
its upbuilding than any other. There is current
contention that every aggregation of wealth that
runs to many millions must necessarily be dishonest.
Ii this be entertained, all names might be classed
alike, but it is hardly fair. There would appear to
exist very decided difference. The Field millions
from the good old fashioned dry goods trade.
altho they have now grown away beyond the con
fines of that business They do not stand for the
ruthless crushing Of struggling business enterprises
the manipulation Of speculative markets. beating
around the law by illegal practices. If any dscrim-
nation is to be made, the Field name would Ger
tainly take precedence at least three others or
the list with reference to honesty Of acquisition
~= When considering the matter Of the danger OF
great fortunes it should not be forgotten that ours
is not the country of closest holdings. The Roths
childs still outrank any family in the world There
are individual fortunes in our country, probabl,
larger than the individual fortune of any one Roths
child but that family is still rich beyond any com
par1son in the world. In France alone the Roths
childs combined rated at the equivalent of twt
billion dollars, but this has not been wholly BAG
thing for France or a menace to her prosperity.