The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-06-28
IS THERE DANGERs
Writing on '"rhe Menace of Pluto cracy." The Portland oregonian says;

Writing on "rhe Menace of Pluto cracy." The Portland Oregonian says: s
 The most striking proof of the States States is S the disposition, W generally manifest. on the part of those who have accumulated great estntes. to make conditions. under which they will remain undivided. and increase or roll up to greater and ever greater proportions. In former times. in our country. the estate. on the death of divided among his heirs. Is is seldom that any considerable estate is now so divided The testator so orders 1t that the@estate shall remain intact, and be used for further accumulation. The lmmediate members af the family are to De taken care of, in some sort. out or the profits, but the estate itself for It's own further aggrandizement and for perpetuation of the power of the family that controls 1t. This is lawful. as our laws stand; but 1t de- stroys equality, establishes plutoc- racy, and is rapidly becoming subver- sive of the conditions necessary to the tenn.
 There is much In this to think about We know there Is more or less of hysteria in some quarters on the sub- ject of great fortunes and their in- fluenee. but there Is some real ground for apprehension. If an immense &C., cumufation like that of Rockefeller, for example. could be divided at his death into several portions. 1t would act as check on the menace of vast wealth, but as The oregonian shows, th's is not done. Suppose that the great wealth of Rockefeller should be left at his death to one man, and that man with a talent for piling up money like he himself possesses. 1t is difficult to think of what it might be at the expiration of another life time. The larger a fortune becomes. the faster it increases, as a general proposition. and the Rockefeller bil- lion of today may be several billions at the end of another lifetime if man. aged as he has managed 1t.
 It is idle to contend that there Is no danger of plutocratic govern ment in this country. We are Re- public, or are supposed to be. but if the time Is coming when we are to be governed by a plutocracy, we be- AlSNC we PTClCI hkh5 UT &h emperor They have some regard for the welI-being of their subjects, but the plutocrat loves the people only for what he can make out of them. There has been more than one instance in the past where the accumulation of wealth and expressions proceeding from that condition. has resulted in the down fall of the government, and 1t may be that America is destined to supply another example. Those who rail against wealth are usually looked on as demagogues, but the country is not entirely safe from plutocracy.
 It would be idle to deny that money too frequently exerts a baleful and undermining influence. in this coun- try. We see it tillustrated every day in the political world, when important offices are bought as certainly and al- most as openly as one would buy a farm. We see it in the halls of legis- lation. where important measures are killed, or injurious and unjust legisla- tion put through by the corruptfhg in- fluence of money. We see it In the financial world when the great corpo- rations crush out the weaker and drive good men to bankruptcy and to the grave. And we see 1t in social life where the very rich not only drive out the poor. but where they can with impunity commit excuses that would consign the poor to oblivlous con- tempt or send them to prison Be- yond a doubt there is a menace in ex- 1 cessive wealth.