The labor world. [volume] (Duluth, Minn.) 1896-current, 1906-02-17
WAS FIELDS. FORTUNE
AMASSEO R|CH7FULLY?
Herbert S. Bigelow Makes
Characteristic inquiry Of
Field Fortune.
Wonders If the Field Estate Is
Not an Example Of Social
Injustice.

CINCINNATI, ONO, EeDrUary ID
Rev Herbert 9. Bigelow. OF the Vine
characteristic inquiry relative to the
Marshall Field fortune In his sermon
last Sunday when he said:
news item headed, Lucky Little
Folks" says. that the three grand
children OF Marshall Field have a heri-
tage Of about forty million each.
Whether or not these children are lucky
is an open question There is, however,
a moro important question to be consid-
cred.
Is the Field estate an example OF So
DIAL injustice or did the Chicago mil
lionaire rightfully accumulate his
wealth?
It - generally assumed that he
earned what he left to these lucky or
unluctxy children. His case is cited as
though 1t were a sufficient answer to
those who claim that no man. by his
own labor, become a multi-millionaire.
The obituary speak of Mr.. Field as
good millionaire because, they say
he was prince of merchants and his
fortune was acquired by his superior
ability in serving the public.
The praise Of Mr.. Field as a good
millionaire betrays the popular feel
ing as to popular m1llionaires in gener-
al. The praise comedies the point that
most Of our great fortunes are not the
Their the fruits Of some system Of
expense of others.
It will not be denied that Mr.. Field
got his start by excelltng in a legiti-
innate business. Had he been a dry
goods merchant and nothing else he
might still have been very rich man.
1t is useless to speculate as to how rich
his ability as a. merchant might have
made him. No one should begrudge
him any amount Of wealth which he
could accumulate as storekeeper.
Since the dry goods business is open
to competition, wealth accumulated in
in the business must, in the main, be
a measure Of the merchants superior
ability to serve the public. Such wealth
is the fruit Of his labor. Each man has
moral right to the full fruit Of his
labor.
But there were opportunities, created
by our bad laws, for Mr.. Field to SO in
vest his rightful earnings that they
yielded him an unearned increment
The greater part Of his vast fortune
came, no doubt, sa result Of these
investments. II It had not been for
these opportunities, which should never
have existed, he could have left his
grandchildren forty million each.
In proof of this 1t is only necessary
to refer to Mr.. Fields holdings In city
lands He owned forty million dollars
worth Of Chicago real estate and ten
million dollars worth of real estate on
Manhattan Island.
Mr.. Field deserves credit for his
shrewdness in investing in the land of
investments enabled him to acquire a
fortune without earning 1t. They en-
abled him to grow rich at the expense
Of other people. They enabled him to
add to his rightful savings as g. mer-
chant the unearned profits Of land
lord.
Upon this point Franklin H. Giddings,
professor Of Sociology in Columbia Uni
versity, writes as follows in the New
York independents:
TT so happens that the really de-
sirable parts Of the earth's surface are
limited in area, and as population
grows the demand for them increases
The narrow island Of Manhattan, for
instance. is advantagiously situated for
Der of human beings may be observed
here carrying on various industr:-~
and trades. Little strips Of land on the
main thoroughfares, nave, in conse-
quence become so valuable that they
are now sold, not by the acre, or even
by the rood. but at so much foot, in
certain instances even at so much an
inch. The men that own these parcels
Of land do not themselves as individuals
Thus Professor Giddings affrms
create Its value, they only take it,"
what Henry George has made common
commercial purposes, and large num-
knowledge. The case has yet to be
cited which proves that a man, start
ing with nothing, can, in the United
States, anass q fortune Of many mil
lions by his own productive effort"