Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The independent. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1902-1907 | View Entire Issue (April 30, 1903)
Vol. XIV. LINCOLN, NEB., APRIL 30, 1903. No. 49. A LIVING WGE Eer. Herbert S. Blgslow Bellereg it Molt More Than Kep Hli Body Alive Cincinnati, 0., April 26 At the Vine Street Congregational church, the pastor, Herbert S. Bigelow, dis cussed the question, What is a living wage? He said in part: "A living wage must be sufficient to keep a man alive. As a man is more than animal, a living wage must do more than keep his body alive. Man is a rational being and a living wage must give him a chance for in tellectual development. - But nature has decreed, and so has . President Roosevelt, that a man shall marry , and raise a family of children, the more the better, according to the president So, then, a living wage must be sufficient to keep an entire family in material comfort, and provide the children with a reasonable education. What is a reasonable education? As this is not Utopia we shall not insist that the workingman's wages ought to be sufficient to enable him to send n his children to college. We shall raise no dispute with those who think the privilege of a higher education may justly be confined to the few, as at present But we have a school sys tem maintained by the people's mon ey. Its aim is to put a good common school education within, reach of every boy and girl" in the republic. There fore, a living wage ought to makeJt possible for every honest,- sober and industrious workingman to enable his children to take full advantage of the opportunities offered by the public schools. He ought not to be com pelled to rely upon the labor of his wife or children, but his earnings alone ought to be sufficient to send his children through the schools of the republic, and to maintain his family in comfort and self-respect "But this is not all. Besides edu cating his family, a living wage ought to be sufficient to enable a man, out of his savings, to buy a home of his own. Is it not a laudable ambition for the workingman, that he should one day dwell under his own vine , and fig tree? A home gives a man a stake in the government It makes him a better citizen. Even if it were not the right of the worker still it - would be the interest of the nation, that his wage' should put a home within his reach. Less than 10 per cent of -the people of New York own their own homes. The" 10 per cent who own the homes of the 90 p. c. own 90 per cent of all the rest of the wealth. It is notorious that those 10 per cent who own 90 per cent of the homes and other property, escape the most of their tax burdens. The bulk 'of the taxes fan upon the 90 per cent. They contribute to the federal gov ernment in increased prices of ev erything they eat and wear. The taxes upon the homes they rent are paid out of their earnings. "Now within the last few years the annual cost of our navy has increase' over fifty millions. . The army and navy together cost $106,000,000 more a year than they did in 1892. : The na tional government will spend next year $170,000,000 on its army and fleet This burden is borne chiefly by the SO per cent of the people who own but 10 per cent of the wealth of the na tion. The 90 per cent are taxed to defend the property of the other 10 per cent. - The social fabric which rests upon such a condition is like a house built upon the sand. It does not take the wisdom of one of your practical statesmen' to fancy a state of affairs which would lead to greater security with less cost If 90 per cent of the people owned their own homes, we could abolish our army and navy, use this one hundred and seventy millions for education, and be infinite ly more formidable to foes from with out or withfn, than we are now. A living wage should contribute to the permanence of socity as well as to the life of the worker. We say there fore that it is for the good of the re public as well as for the individual worker that his wage should enable him to own a home of his own. r "Nor is this all. After educating his family and paying for a home, a man ought to be able to lay by enough to make him reasonably independent in time of sicjeness or old age. That was the idea of the prophet His dream was not merely that a man should dwell under his own vine and fig tree, but that none should make him afraid. In a word, that beyoud having a home of his own, and op portunities for his family, and fuel and clothes and food sufficient for them, a man should have a bank ac count, so that a temporary sickness would not throw him into debt, and so -that the thought of old age or loss of employment would not hang over him like a pall. "This was Isaiah's notion of a liv ing wage. In words that have rung with hope through all the centuries,' Isaiah has proclaimed the day of la bor's emancipation, and of the work ers in that day he has declared: "'They shall build houses and in habit them; they shall plant vine yards and eat the fruit of them. They shall not build and another inhabit: they, shall not plant and another eat They shall not labor in vain, nor bring forth for trouble.' "We maintain that there is some thing radically wrong with our so cial order, if it is not possible for ev ery able-bodied man, who is in .his right mind, and who is sober and faithful, to command for his labor a living wage, such as we have de scribed. If a man cannot work he ought to be fed. To those who are maimed in body or feeble in mind, society ought in all charity, nay, as a matter of justice, to secure a whole so'ie living. To those who will not work; if there be such, society owes nothing. Moreover, if a man is neg ligent, or indolent or intemperate, It is right that society should let him reap the fruits of his own folly. There is no better way for him to learn. But if a man is normal in mind and body, and if he is willing to work, if he is sober and provident, and if he is unable to get for his labor a living wage, then we have a right to con clude that the fault is with society and not with him, and then it be comes our duty to inquire, 'What have we done to keep this man from get ting a living wage, or what may we do to make it possible for him to live as every American citizen ought - to 'tve?' i ' - "There are' literally millions of mTi in these United , States who, by the laws and institutions of our society, are deprived of a living wage. Their lives aiv xracre miserable by want or fear of want. They can never hope to own the roof over their heads. They are obliged to take take their children out of school and put them in the factory. Their earnings, com bined with the earnings of their chil dren, do not permit them to have fresh air, and wholesome surround ings, nor even enough food and cloth ing for the comfort of those they love. They are exposed,. by their poverty, to unnatural temptations. Their condi tions almost inevitably lead to a low tone of moral life, from which many sink into vice and crime. "Can we hold God responsible for these things? Is nature at fault? "Men were once deceived by that kind of defense, but we know better now. The fault lies with society. A better society is possible. If men are not able to earn a living wage it is because human laws interfere with them. Realizing this, how can we es cape our duty to study the science of political economy and learn how to make men free? Shall we plead with Cain that we are not our brother's keeper? Can we. expect the good God to answer our prayer for blessings when, we are not willing to hear our brother's prayer for justice?" Single Tax In Boston The president of the Massachusetts single tax league, C. B. Fillebrown, re cently addressed a company of Boston landlords on the nature of eround rent, and more particularly the vol ume of such rent existing in the city of Boston at present As a basis of calculation he secured the records of 120 sales of real estate and i?51 rent als of estates: from which Drettv broad groundwork he reached the con clusion that Boston land values (or capitalized ground rental values) ag gregate $842,600,000, 5 per cent of which would give about $42,000,000 as the gross ground rent of the city. Accepting this calculation as ap proximately correct,, then it would follow that the people of the city pay $42,000,000 annually . for the use of the land. Of this sum going to th land owners, about $8,480,000 is given back to the public in taxes as now levied, and the real is retained. - Ad ditional to this present tax on land, there is annually collected iriaxes on buildings and personal property the sum of about $9,486,000, making a to tal present tax on land, buildings and personalty of about $18,000,000, or considerably less than five-tenths of the estimated yearly yield of land val ues alone to the landlords of the city. Mr. Fillebrown advocates the centrali zation of taxes upon ground rent, which would mean, in the case of Boston, that the landlords be required to give up to the public on the basis of present public expenditure less than five-tenths of their ground rent instead of the two-tenths ($8,480,000) now taken.' As ground rent is a value created by the community as a whole, and not by the land owners, he bases his demand on grounds of simple jus tice; but presumes to be dealing gen tly with the landlords in still leaving to them oyer one-half their ground rent and in exempting their buildings and personal property from further taxation. We are not told that the company of landlords piesent were so far impressed as to be willing to ac cede to this proposal. There is much to be said in favor of this disposal of the tax question, or the appropriation to the state of so "much of the annual yield of land val ues . (ground apart from improve ments) as is needed to meet public expenses. ' As Henry George has re quired a whole book - to present these favorable considerations, we shall not undertake even to summarize them. Granting their general soundness, the question still remains, Can the land owner ever be brought voluntarily to consent to the arrangement? and should it be forced upon him without his consent supposing that were possible? . Both of these questions must be an swered in the negative; and the im possibility, in this country, where the land owner forms so large a part of the electorate, of forcing the arrange ment upon him is recognized by the land taxers themselves. Their task is now to convince the landlords of the desirability of the changes from their standpoint, which is an up-hill undertaking. That it can ever succeed is to be doubted. It is idle to urge as full compensation the - relief to the land owner from other; taxes. In some cases he might gain from ex emption on buildings, other improve ments and personal property, what he would lose in increased : land taxes; but in most cases probably he would not; and the state, in taxing land val ues alone, has put itself in the way of appropriating the whole unearned in-' crement, which js the: one thing in real estate investment that attracts and enriches. 1 , ! The single taxers are fighting from high motives, on strong economic grounds, and with a persistence , that excites admiration. " But so deeply is private land ownership imbedded in the industrial establishment of the country, and so v?IJogpread is it among the people, that practical con siderations alone,' apart from a ques tion of right and justice, must bring Into the land tax campaign the mat ter more or less full compensation to land owners, if it is ever to make great headway. Springfield Republican. Teddy's Change of View Mr. .Roosevelt is a young man still, but when he was much I younger ; than he is now he was a free trader of such vigorous hue that, on one occasion, he announced that he would "die for free trade." Practically, he has since learned nothing concerning the tariff, but he had accepted , the , post hoc propter hoc sort of philosophy to which protectionists have resorted in these days of the degeneracy of their doctrine, and he is, therefore, ready to say, with home market clubs and other like disinterested - authorities, that because we are now prosperous we are so because of the tariff law. This is utter folly, of course, but the president does not know, it, because since the day when he was a crusad ing knight of free trade he has learned that the, doctrine of extreme protec tion's essential to the life of his party. Harper's Weekly. JUGGLED FIGURES New York Clearing Hoots Be port Fear folly aad Wonderfully Made to Fool Country Bankera " Editor Independent: Thfr constant effort of the eastern financial inter ests, by deception and pretense, to inspire confidence, is manifest in the report of the New York clearing house for the week ending April 18. ', Loans and discounts are reported to have been increased $2,427,800 and deposits $2,459,400. The Increase of deposits was immediately (except $31,600) absorbed by the increase of loans. The bankers' surplus is reported at $6,007,650. This is an Increase over last week of $2,606,350. The press re porters (no doubt taking the state ment from "bull" stock gamblers) call this a favorable report. Last week the bankers' surplus was re ported at $3,741,300 of which $1,030, 400 was government money deposited during the week. This week there v, as deposited with the national banks belonging to the, clearing house $2, 260,475 while the" increase of surplus is reported at $2,666,350 or only $205, 875 in excess of the increase of . United States deposits. During" the two weeks, the government contri buted to the bankers' surplus by de posit loans $3,290,775. ?"; It is not possible to have accurate knowledge of just what is going" on among these clearing house banks, and between them and the United States treasury department It Is not intended by them or the department that the public should know. It is not a violent inference to suppose that .what is desired is, that not enough of the real situation shall be known to cause the country banks to withhold from these New York banks the deposit loans that the banks mak ing ihe deposits are unwisely per mitted to count as reserves. Under the : order of Secretary Shaw, made several months ago, the national banks are relieved; from the duty, imposed upon them by law, to hold a . reserve against the 7 United States deposit loans made by his department. The report for the week ending April 18 states that there was, dur ing 'the week as stated above, an in crease of deposits of $2,459;400 and that the United. States deposits were increased $2,260,475. The statement of the report that the increase of re serve required was $614,850 this be ing 25 per cent of the $2,459,400 the government deposits were not includ ed in the calculation of deposits by which the required reserve is ascer tained. . " The. total United States deposits held by these clearing house banks at (he end of the week is reported to have been $15,321,250. Ifthe deposits had been included in the calculation to determine the reserve required, there would not have been" a dollar of surplus in the aggregate in the clear ing house banks. In other words. . when the banks made the calculation to , determine the required reserve, they exclude (by permission of Sec retary Shaw) the government depos its; but when they make the calcula tion to determine the bankers' surplus they include government deposits. If the whole of the United States de posits held by the New York clearing house banks on the 18th had been withdrawn, under this method of cal culation, there would have been no change in the reserve-required, but the whole of the bankers surplus would have disappeared, and these banks in the aggregate would have been shown to be short in their act ual: reserves held $9,313,700. There can be no other reasonable conclusion than that the order of Secretary Shaw permitting the national banks to thus violate the law, was intended to en able the New York banks to make this deceptive and misleading showing, and to make it possible for these banks to loan what 6therwlse they would be compelled to hold in cash as a reserve. To call such a condition as this "favorable" isjjoth ignorant and wicked. The whole device is in the aid of stock gamblers. If it should be that any considerable part of the $905, 207,300 of loans and discounts held by these banks are secured by deposits of stocks, it would explain the appar