',. T""
FEBRUARY S, 1007
The Commoner.
5
TWTsyyjwarv; B .":r;.
THE CONCENTRATION OF WEALTH
Henry Laurens Call delivered an address bo-
Core the American Association for the Advance-
i
linen t of Science at its recent session in New York
City. This address was entitled "The Concentra
tion of Wealth." and because of sninn of hts.Htata-
r. ,. ----- ----
raienis air. uau nas been bitterly assailed, no has
Jfound it advisable to issue a statement making
certain corrections In the published report of his
address. Mr. Call says that he is not, as reported,
a member of the socialist party, but has been for
ifteen years a student and writer upon economic
subjects. In his statement Mr. Call says:
"My estimate as to wealth concentration, is that
one per cent of uie population of the United States,
now own practically ninety per cent of the en-
Ltire wealth of the nation. This estimate is based
upon a compilation referred to by Senator Iu-
E&galls upon the floor of the United States senate,
W-r , Horn j. 11.. .r.-i ...... -. -rt
iJiiuuary jl, xovi, to uie enect unit jjl,uu persons
rthen owned 5G per cent of the wealth of the na-
itlon. With tliis also substantially agrees (for
ithe purpose of this estimate) the computations of
VDv. Chas. B. Spahr, to the effect that one per cent
of our population, owned, in 1890, 51 per cent of
the national wealth; and of Mr. Geo. K. Holmes,
fof the census bureau, to the effect that 3-100 of
Pone per cent of our population then owned 20 per
cent of our national wealth; as also numerous
other authorities, substantially uncontradicted at
apart of statisticians, that one per cent, or less than
Bone per cent, of our population owned, in 1800,
jjpractically half the wealth of the nation.
"1,-uowever, insist uiat m oruer to maKe tnese
sstatistics (of seventeen years ago) applicable to-
tday, allowance must first be made for the known
increase, both in size and number, of the enor-
ious fortunes responsible for that condition; due
in part to ordinary interest rates, but also, and
especially, to trust formation, railway 'reorgani
sation,' and- other causes set forth at length in
my article.
"My estimate as to indebtedness, is based
ftipon the census of 1890, giving our mortgage,
bond, and general indebtedness, public and pri
vate, at that time, as $18,027,170,54.0. The census
fof 1900 is reprehensibly silent upon this import
fant subject; and, notwithstanding . the excessive
bonding of our corporations within this period, 1
'have assumed that our indebtedness lias increased
only in the same proportion as our national wealth
Mias itself increased; bringing the total at this date
to, approximately, $30,000,000,000.
"I then continue: 'But the stocks of our rail
way, trust, and other corporations, are expected
to draw dividends, and constitute as truly an in-
f debtedness upon the part of the public to the own
ers of wealth as do mortgages and bonds them
selves; and these, under their .present enormous
over-capitalization, -would perhaps double our
debt burden; with the power given these corpora
tions to levy a tax upon the industry and prop-
iv erty or. uie nation, as exiuniuiiuiu m u.yluul ua
were that debt burden to exceed, in fact, all the
h actual, tangible wealth of the nation.' It will be
t seen, at" a glance, that tills is a vastly different
statement from that attributed to me in the re
ports, to the effect that this indebtedness does
in fact exceed all the actual, tangible wealth of
F, the nation.
"In disproof of this estimate, as to wealth con
centration, an enumeration is given of farms,
homes, savings bank .deposits, insurance policies,
and even corporation stocks, in the possession of
the people; while a distinguished financier disposes
of my estimate as to indebtedness, by the asser
tion that 'a share of stock in a corporation is not
a debt in the economic sense of the term; but is
simply the certificate of title to joint ownership
in a valuable property;' and therefore concludes
that this estimate Is 'intrinsically absurd.'
"But, however our financiers may settle this
question to their own satisfaction, so far as the
public is concerned the payment of dividends
upon these stocks differs only in name from the
payment of interest upon the bonds; and the pub
lic it is that pays both interest and dividends;
even as it has already paid for the properties
themselves, besides contributing to the enormous
fortunes of the financiers in control.
"What, indeed, is the preponderating part- of
the 'valuable property,' of -which these stocks are
'a certificate of title to,' but the power given
these corporations to tax the public upon all its
products, supplies, and public services? This it
Is that has already compelled the public not only
to pay for the properties, but also to build up
the enormous fortunes of the exploiters of these
corporations; and that now enables these finan
ciers to recapitalize the properties at three, or even
five, times their real worth. The same ?40,000,
000,000 of those 'securities,' thus constitute, in
fact, a first lien, or 'blanket' mortgage, upon all
the property of the nation; and hot until this in
cumbrance is 'lifted' can the farmer or other cit
izen be said, in any true sense, to own his farm
or home; nor, until then, can any enumeration of
farms or homes, as being 'popularly owned,' oe
considered at all conclusive upon this subject, or
as substantially affecting my estimate of wealth
concentration.
"Nor yet can the people be said, to an appre
ciable extent, to be the proprietors of those cor
porations. If the wage-earner has invested his
hard-earned and, scantily spared, savings in a
share of corporation stock, it is because he has
been lured, as in the case of the United States
Steel Corporation, into the belief that his jnvest
ment would be safe, as well as available in case
of need. And with this well remembered ex
ception, and perhaps two or three other opera
tions of like character, the owners of these cor
poration stocks will, as a rule, bo found very
safely included within the 800,000 names, consti
tuting the one pei cent of our population desig
nated as the so-called 'wealthy class' embraced
in my estimate.
"Nor yet can the items of savings bank de
posits, and insurance policies extant, be said to
argue the possession of wealth in the body of the
people. The few dollars deposited in the savings
bank, usually constitutes the sole dependence of
the toiler and his family against sickness, the loss
of employment, or any of the thousand and one
vicissitudes of life that beset the 'hand-to-mouth'
existence of the great body of our population; and
. it therefore remains, and is Increased, as a pre
cious possession; even though the debts of the
depositor may exceed, many times, the small
pittance deposited. So also insurance is, again,
almost the sole dependence of the toiler's family
in case of his death; and is, therefore, taken out,
and the premium paid, so long as the holder can
beg or borrow a dollar, and regardless of every
other obligation. The liabilities of the depositor
or insured must needs be placed against such
asset before we can decide as to his solvency;
much less as to his wealth.
"These estimates, as also the conclusions
drawn from them, are revolutionary of accepted
notions; and I expect them to bo bitterly assailed. -As
here given, however, they are, at least, what
I intended to say, and am prepared to substan
tiate. Unfortunately, owing to a miscarriage in
the mails, I did not receive the program oT the
Sections, advising me that an abstract of my pa
per would be required, until the morning of the
day the paper was to be read. The abstract was
hastily dictated, and received from the stenog
rapher as I was burrying to the Association hall;
giving mo no opportunity for correction. I, how
ever, did, almost immediately after the paper whs
read, take the paper itself to the press headquar
ters; and was assured that this, instead of the
abstract, would be made the basis of the reports.
"By way of personal explanation, I desire to
say- that I am not a member of the Socialist
party. I, however, have been for fifteen years
a student and writer upon economic subjects. Of
my first work, published twelve years ago, the
New York World itself, (now widely quoted In
criticism of my reported utterances), was pleased
to say: 'The Coming Revolution,' by Henry I.
Call, is a scientific, cold-blooded, mathematical
analysis of modern industrial society, in which
the tangled web of economic falsities, inconsis
tencies, and anomalies, Is shown with the clear
ness of demonstration of a professor of anatomy.'
And other leading newspapers, and statesmen us
well, were not less high in their encomiums.
Since then I have written various works upon
economic subjects, but always under a nom-de-plume;
profoundly indifferent as to any- desire
to enroll my name with the 'would-be-famous,'
or in the archives of 'Who's Who In America
It was because the eminent scientists, in charge
of the economic section of the association, were
familial; with my writings, that a communication
was addressed to me requesting me to present a
paper before the association. My appearance be
fore that honorable body was, therefore, not an
accident; and it remains for a perusal of the ar
ticle itself, to determine as to whether or not it
is 'scientific in basis and character."
A MISSOURI FARMER'S VIEWS
A Fairhaven, Mo., reader of The Commoner
writes:
"You'll have to lot mo tell you what a Missouri
farmer thinks about the 'no-cent' currency which
the banks are trying to materialize. The Green
back cause, along in the '70's and early '80's, was
laughed down, and the nation's currency ridiculed
as 'Irredeemable trash,' 'fiat money,' 'rag baby,'
and the like. We all remember how Tom Nast'a
pencil was busy in those dnys with cartoons and
comicalities belittling the very money which had
but recently saved uie life of the nation. But now
comes a new 'rag baby,' of a baser sort a kind
of 'Betsy Bouncer' (seo comic papers) stuffed
witli sawdust and puffed up with 'hot air' from
Wall Street. To carry the figure a little further:
The bankers' forthcoming 'rag baby' will bo illegit
imate. Wall Streetthe plutocracy is its father;
but Uncle Sam is expected to shoulder the burden
of parentage though 'it's none o his'n!' But hold
on! If Uncle Sam has to assume a paternal posi
tion of even Uie most Indirect kind, why shouldn't
he have an emergency' currency of his very own?
The supreme court decision of 3882 (I think that
is the date), established the 'Greenback Idea' as
a basic national principle a 'sovereign' powe
Then why not have the government assume the
full responsibility of the proposed 'no-cent' cur
rency, and send It out (exactly as proposed)
through the medium of the banks, allowing them
to keep a" small bonus (out of the Interest) for
handling the 'emergency' paper? Then let the
balance of the interest (together with the principal)
be turned back into the national treasury, when
the financial stringency has been relieved. In other
words, instead of the government receiving a pit
tance, and the banks getting a big profit out of
the new currency, let the government get the
profits, and make yes, compel the banks to
handle the business, with the public, for a small
remuneration. If the banks 'kick' (as they surely
will), against tills plan, then establish postal sav
ings banks at every county seat in the country,
and let these handle the 'emergency' currency, arid
also receive deposits from the common people
the useful classes. Anyhow, why not be up to
date, like other nations? It is safe to say, however,
that no plan of financial or industrial relief
whether it come from sources high or low, nor
whether it be already adopted by other nations
can ever bo proposed In this enlightened land of
ours, without being met by bitter, por&lstenl, and
even unscrupulous" opposition from tiie many
mouthpieces of an organized plutocracy. If rho
capitalisuc forces of this country wou.d only try
half as hard to Di'omote real reform as they do to.
prevent It, the 'agitator' would soon lose his Job,
and the reformer would have to take a rest."
oooo
INCREASE OR DECREASE
The London Statist having expressed the opin
ion that an asset currency bill "giving power to
national banks to Increase their note circulation"
would be passed by the American congress the
Wall Street Journal says that the Statist is wrong
in "placing any reliance upon relief through Amer
ican currency legislation." The Journal adds:
"There seems to be little chance whatever of the
passage of the credit note bill. The most that
can reasonably be expected Is a law to Increase
the amount of the bond secured circulation that
could be retired in any month. The house com
mittee on banking is in favor of increasing the
limit of retirement from $3,000,000 to $15,000,000."
JEo some this statement may sound ridiculous.,
Think over it for a moment! There seems to he
no hope that the congress will give the banks
the power to increase the volume of currency f
then perhaps the congress will give the banks
the power to reduce the volume of currency! It
is not ridiculous although the statement may
seem so to some. There is method in the mad
ness of 'the men who stand behind this plan. They
would like to have the power to Increase or de
crease the volume of currency according to their
pleasure; but if the American congress will not at
this time give thern the power to increase the vol
ume, then, perhaps, they will give them the power
to decrease it by making material increase in the,
amount of national bank notes whicli they may
retire. Then having secured this concession tor
a while the bankers may yet obtain the privilege
of increasing the currency. With the power to
expand or contract at pleasure they will have
greater power over the American government and
over the American people than was ever thought
of by men who dreamed of a government built
with Uie view of securing the greatest good for
the greatest number.
