Fergus County argus. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1886-1946, 1906-05-22
WHERE SOCIALISTS GO WRONG.
Figures OF Speech Which Conflict With
Figures Of Fact a. to Wealth
Ao1din0a

Figures Of Speech Which Conflict With
Figures Of Fact 40 to Wealth
Holdings.
1t has long been the practice of the
socialistic agitator in haranguing peo-
pie who will listen to him to assert
that under the present "capitalistic
system" a few men are rapidly get
ting all the wealth of the country into
their own hands and that the day is
near when they will own everything
and have everybody else at their
mercy.
Not so very long ago this stere0typed
assertion was that thirty men owned
more than one-half the wealth of the
country, or something about to that
effect.
Just what form of statement these
people are now handing out as the cor
rect thing, the Chronicle will not un.
dertake to say. 1t may be that twenty
people own three-fourths of the wealth !
or such matter. The exact formula
is not material.
This sort of assertion comes very
handy for the reckless agitator. be-
cause the census does not show who
owns the wealth and other sources of
information are unreliable, and it is
therefore impossible to produce official
figures showing even approximately
the truth of the matter. But We have
plenty of facts indicating unmistak-
ably that thirty men do not own one
half the country's wealth or anything
like it,
That fiction was current as long ago
as 1855, when the country was prosper
ing greatly despite the calamity proph.
cts who had told us that the resump
ton of specie payments spelt ruin.
and it is still with us.
To begin with, it has been open to
common observation that from that
day to this we have had many men
of moderate fortunes running from
$4,000 to $1,0O0,000. Every town of
any size. especially in the northern
states, has had one or more such men,
and it has been equally open to COM
mon observation that the number of
| these small fortunes has been increas-
ing in a greater ratio than the total
population.
We see almost everywhere in fine
residences and equipages-carriage
and automobiles-and other fine things
abundant evidence that where twenty
years ago people in comfortable cir
cumstances were numbered by tens
they are now numbered by hundreds.
1t is notorious, too, that wages have
advanced largely throughout the coun-
try and that the poor" as they are
called, SO far from being poorer, are
decidedly better off than they were.
The census statistics so far as they
shed light on the subject confirm this
statement.
The farm statistics, for instance,
show that the number Of farms in the
country increased from 4,OOS,9O7 in
to 5,737,372 in 1900, and that the
number operated by their owners in
creased from 2,9S4,s06 to 3,712,4OS
This certainly does not show that
farms have been passing from the
hands of the many into the hands of
a few.
We find palmer and more general
indication in the statistics of wealth.
The figures of the census show that
the total realized wealth of the country
was $42.642,O 100000 in 1880, $65,O37,-
100000 in 1890 and $4,000, 100000 IN
1900.
A very simple arithmetical process
will show that if thirty men owned
over one-half of these totals each man
of them owned an average of at least
$71O,0O0,OOO in 1880, $1,O83, 100000 in
!; 1890. and $3,143 100000 in 1900.
This bare statement shows how pre-
: posterous is the assertion that thirty
men now own or ever owned one-half
: of the wealth of the country. 1t shows
, that the assertion is falsehood with
cut the least foundation in fact.
| There is not man living, it is safe
! to say, who is now worth $1,OOO,OOO,.
| 600, much less thirty men in this coun'
T try each worth on the average three
times that enormous sum. To say that
!. We have thirty men worth $4,000. 900,
t 900 in the aggregate, or an average oil
l $1O0, 100000 each, might be to keel
t within the bounds of the credulity Of
= the most receptive mariner, but II
: would be very extravagant.
: Nothing is more common than to ex
3 aggerate the fortunes of those who ars
Y reputed to be rich, and the credulous
will generally believe almost anything
that anybody may take it into his heas
to say about the colossal wealth of {
J. Rockefeller. 1t is a natural conse
l. quence that when the man dies an,
J. his estate comes to be settled and pu
J. to the test of a state inheritance tai
s there is prodigious shrinkage.