The Washington times., 1915-01-24
GETTING, NOT EARNING

John G. Wendell, man Of whom
few people in New York knew any
thing until he died short time ago,
turns out to have been perhaps the
largest individual owner Of valuable
real estate in the metropolis. When
he died there was wonderment at
the immensity of the estate he left;
it was reported that it might reach
$50, 100000.
Now the administrators have filed
an appraisal of the estate, and it is
stated as exceeding $80,OO0,0O0 and
possibly reaching $1OO,0OO,oOO. The
marvel of one mans accumulation of
such an immense property in such an
unobtrusive way that almost nobody
even knew of his operations, seems
beyond belief. But it happened.
In a proceeding some years ago,
in which piece of the Wendell prop
erty was being condemned for a pub
lie improvement, Wendell fought the
condemnation, and stated that it
was the policy of his estate never
to sell any property. He declared
that for 200 years it had not dis
posed of a, parcel IN the great city.
1t bought, but never sold.
Wendell, dying, left no will. He
was unmarried, and his estate auto
matically went to sisters, two of
whom were named as administrators.
There was some delay about the pro-
bate because it was necessary to
learn just what debts the estate
owed: Now it is reported by the ad-
ministrators that no debts of any
kind whatever have been found. Ap-
parently this immense aggregation
of property, rolling up like snow
ball for 200 years in one family,
owed absolutely nothing.
1t was the Wendell policy not TO
sell, and seldom to improve. Instead
piece of property would be leased,
on such terms that the lessee might
improve it, the improvements to re-
vert to the estate at the end of the
lease. The estate got the income
from the lease, and later owned the
erections. The income was invested
in more realty, and so the pile kept
growing.
A case like this forces attention to
the question of whether a man like
Wendell does anything for the COM
munity that deserves such a reward
in wealth and power. Manifestly
Wendell did not add to the value of
the lands he held, for it was distinct
ly his policy to make somebody else
do that. The Wendell policy was
simply to sit still and let the other
people of the community bring trib-
ute to the landlord. The man who
leased the property seemed to be the
tribute-payer; but, of course, the
community as a whole, whose exist
ence and whose manifold activities
made the property useful and en-.
abled it to earn great rentals, was
the real payer.
Should the community pay such a
tribute to the mere shrewdness of a
man or a dynasty that is able thus
to tax its very right of existence
its right to work, to do business
Every census of New York gave ar
index of the rising value of Wen
del's holdings; for it showed large,
number of people who were all, by
their presence and their activities
doing something to put more valre
into those Wendell parcels of land
Everybody except Wendell did some
thing to increase the values; Wendc
merely got those increases, and in
vested them in the pleasant business
of rolling his SNOWFALL of million:
bigger and yet bigger.
People are more and more ques
tioning the social justice of such
accumulations, more and more doubt
ing whether these things are un
ayoidable, more and more disposed
to attempt measures that will better
balance the benefits of community
development. The notion that sys
tenn is sacred because it has Ions
existed, is not so firmly trenched al
it used to be. Such cases as thi
one have lately been giving point t.
a deal of the argumenv long indulget
by people supposed TO De very radi
cal, but whose radicalism IS less ant
less offensive as it is emphasized h,
such instances.
| A SWORD IN THE SHEATH