Page images

rush on and attain, they give up in de- the ground of “undue influence,” or to spair and enlist in the army of trade, is it wink, as it sometimes does, when in muthe age that is to blame? Or is it the nicipal affairs a committee appointed to masters of the age, those men who think examine into the soundness of a work it nefarious that the young men and is composed of those who have done the women of America should idle with art work. And apart from this, we are not when trade is in danger, whose armies sure that the training of professors is are calling for recruits, and who, using such as to make it possible for them to the machinery of education, see to it that find out what we want to know. What their will is obeyed, that their fighting we want to know is what is the matter line is kept full ? We ask again, is there with our literature. If something were some dark contract that is being fulfilled ? the matter with our finances we would Are the millions that are being poured call in not professors of finance but finaninto the coffers of our universities really ciers. If something were wrong with not a charity but a price paid for service ? our art we would consult not teachers

One of the largest of these institutions of art but artists. Then if we suggest has lately appointed a committee to as- that in the present case the committee certain, if possible, why it is that the be composed not of professors of literascores who annually go from her sup- ture but of producers of literature we posedly equipped for the production of believe we are within the lines of common great books, are afterwards never heard

And we would further suggest of, or heard of only as space-writers for that the scope of the investigation be the daily press or as contributors to the extended, that the committee be asked magazines. Has this been done to allay to inquire into and state, first, whether the growing suspicions of the public and it find the method employed in teaching to stay its wrath ? One of those investi- literature to be, as we claim, the anatomgations the purpose of which is to pre- ical method; second, whether it find vent investigation? Or is it really a the condition on which fellowships are sign of the dawn? Can it be that our awarded to be, as we claim, an aptitude universities are actually waking up? for dissecting literature; and third, as And they have begun to lose faith in their to the cause of these stupendous follies. own creed that the cause is in the age! And finally, we would suggest that the

We confess we should much prefer to report be made public. If the work is see this investigation carried on by out

out- done as its importance demands that it side parties. This arrangement would should be done, the document should be more satisfactory all round. The become historic. public would then have no cause to ques


DAVIES tion the findings of the committee on Cincinnati, Ohio.




, gain is nil if his losses

sions of the immigration problem equal his profits. have yielded a prolific crop of endorse- If the immigrant's “value" as a conments of the “ value” of good immigrants. sumer equaled his value as a producer

Quite naturally, these gentlemen, whose there would be no immigration problem horizon is bounded by the counting-house other than an embargo on criminals, the and the stock-market, dilate upon the demented and the physically incapable. "value" of immigrants, even comparing Then American workingmen would them with the salable price of negroes have no cause for opposing his entry, nor in ante-bellum days, in proof of their would the American manufacturer desire theory.

to import him. That the former opposes Of"value" to whom ? it may be asked. and the latter stimulates immigration

As the immigrant usually brings little proves that as a producer and consumer but strength, and habits of industry and the immigrant is not in balance. thrift, whence comes this "value"? Of If he is not in balance in these two what does it consist ?

capacities, what is the cause? Oh! we are told, he is valuable as a Before seeking the answer, let us first producer and consumer.

inquire upon what the exponents of the How clear! This is about as lucid as "value" theory base their contention. the average college professor's political Do they mean that an increase in numeconomy.

bers increases efficiency in production, It is as wise as it would be to say, that and, therefore, a greater production reloss and profit are equally valuable to sults ? the manufacturer or merchant.

If so, there should be a corresponding Production is profit, but consumption reduction in price. is loss. No amount of fetich worship of If, for instance, three persons produce, the "favorable” balance-of-trade theory say, 8, while four would produce 12, then can make it anything else.

a reduction of price should result of from First, as to producers. How are pro- gths, to Aths, or, for better comparison, ducers benefitted by the addition to their from ths, to ths. number of another producer-an immi

If this had been general the most eager grant ?

to welcome immigrants would be other Is production made easier for them ? workers. If production of their products is increased It is admitted by all that increased is not the price of their product reduced ? numbers does result in a relatively

As to consumers. How are consumers greater production. Has there been a benefited by an increase in the number corresponding reduction in price to conof consumers ?

sumers ? No one so contends. Why If an increase of products lowers prices not? Why does not this natural law to consumers, does not an increase in operate? Why is it that from the workconsumption raise them to consumers ? ers comes the opposition to immigration ?

But some say: “The immigrant's ‘val- The reason is obvious. They find ue'as a producer is balanced by his 'val- that an increase in available workers ue'as a consumer”!

decreases the chances—and, therefore, If so, his "value" is eliminated, just as the remuneration for workers.


Evidently the balance is out of gear. rect, then the return to the one thousand Evidently their “value” as

inhabitants has been increased $40x10, does not equal their“ value” as producers. or $400 equal to 40 cents a head. AlAnd this in spite of the increased efficiency though small it is nevertheless a gain, which their numbers give.

and the workers naturally say, if ten helps Why? Because there has been an in- why not ten thousand? The following terference with the natural law.

year, therefore, immigration having been Why are employers so anxious for im- induced to that extent, the original one migration ?

thousand find their wages increased by If an increase in the number of pro- 4c.x10,000, or $400 apiece, this, of course ducers resulted in an increase of pay cor- being an addition to their own wages. responding to the increased efficiency in In other words, assuming that the one production, would employers be so anx- thousand original inhabitants constituted ious to facilitate immigration ?

two hundred families, then each family If such increased production resulted would as a result of the settling in that either in an increase of pay of, say, from place of the ten thousand immigrants, 24ths to ths, or in a reduction of prices receive an increase of wages of $2,000. of from ths to ths, would employers But it will be said that these figures are encourage immigration ?

fanciful, ridiculous, preposterous. Not If they did, we may be sure it would at all. Not if the theory of “value” is not be in their capacity of employers, but sound, and if it applies, as it is insinuated in some other capacity.

it does, to the whole people, i. e., to everyIt must be remembered that workers body in the country. This hypothetical seldom have any other relation to their case is neither fanciful, ridiculous, nor employers than that of workers, while preposterous. It more than has its employers (merchants and manufactu- counterpart in actual facts. Instead of rers) are frequently also landowners these people profiting to the extent of entirely apart from their real estate used $2,000 a family by the presence in their for manufacturing or merchandising. midst of ten thousand immigrants, their

In this is to be found a part of their gain will be much greater ifdesire to increase the available number If what? If they have been “shrewd ” of workers, as their land is made more enough, “sagacious” enough, “ astute valuable by the added population and enough, “far-seeing” enough, to get title the increased demand for its use. At the to not only the comparatively limited same time the increase in workers in- area they originally occupied, but also creases the competition for employment that larger area around them which would and so forces down the price to be paid be needed by the ten thousand when they to workers.

arrived. Then the more sagacious But test the “value” theory from an- among them would not merely have unother standpoint.

earned incomes of $2,000 a year, but, as So experienced an employer-and mo- more immigrants came, either from nopolist--as Andrew Carnegie puts the abroad or by birth, they would find the “ value” at a thousand dollars a head. reward of their “sagacity” in forestalling Accepting this as the correct measure of immigrants would run into hundreds of “ value” let us see how it works.

thousands and finally into millions of Suppose a community of a thousand dollars a year. And that very thing has inhabitants, and that ten immigrants ar- happened. rive. This $1,000 is based, I assume, While there is no trustworthy data upon upon an estimate of 25 years of efficient which to base an estimate of the annual production, or an annual “value” of $40. value of the land of the United States,

If the thousand dollar theory is cor- yet, the best obtainable information is that the annual value of land in the city of comes from abroad. He is wrong, howNew York is not less than $250,000,000, ever, in assuming that his fight is with i. e., its rental value. This amount is the employer as such. It is rather with now being paid by the immigrants (native the man--whether employer or not-who as well as foreign) to the few thousand monopolizes land, thereby forcing workers who got possession of the land and to compete with each other for its use, who have been “holding it " for them, with the result that the monopolist draws otherwise it would, of course, have run to himself an ever increasing proportion away.

of the yield of the activities of labor and One family—the Astors-are credited capital. with the possession of $450,000,000 of Until the workers turn their attention New York city real estate. Undoubtedly to the dog-in-the-manger, who, doing from two-thirds to three-fourths of this nothing useful himself, yet because of his is land value. Let us put it at two-thirds, monopolization of natural opportunities, $300,000,000, and the yield at five per is able to demand the lion's share of all cent. or $15,000,000 a year. The re- production, we may expect that he will turn to the two hundred families of my continue to strike blindly at effects (imhypothetical community pales into in- migration) instead of at causes (landsignificance when compared to the return monopoly). And he is not to be seriously the Astors get from immigration-do- blamed if he does, as honest capital, i. e., mestic and foreign. They, at least, will non-monopolistic, is equally blind. It not dispute the Carnegie theory that each strikes at labor instead of at the common immigrant has a value”. of $1,000. enemy, monopoly. The average capitalTheir only regret is that some of this ist, no more than the average working

value” slips past them as it goes to form man, understands that the value" of the basis of other land fortunes in the an immigrant inures to him who monopoWest and South where some of the immi- lizes the soil upon which and from which grants settle.

all, whether immigrant or native, must The American workingman is correct live, and from which all wealth must be in assuming that the immigrant intensi- produced. fies competition, but the native-born

ROBERT BAKER. child does this just as much as he who Brooklyn, N. Y.

[ocr errors]

Prepared by Professor FRANK PARSONS, Ph.D., President of the National Public-Ownership League and author of The City for the People ; ELTWEED POMEROY, President of the National DirectLegislation League; GEORGE H. SHIBLEY, President of the People's Sovereignty League of America; Hon. J. WARNER Mills; ALLAN L. BENSON; Dr. C. F. TAYLOR; RALPH ALBERTSON, Secretary of the Massachusetts Referendum League; J. P. CADMAN; Dr. J. R. HAYNES; W. S. ÚÄREN; and the

Editor of THE ARENA.



voters, say five, eight or ten per cent.,

within sixty or ninety days of the passage The Referendum.

of the law petition that the people have WHAT is meant by the Referen- the right to pass on the measure,

the endum ?

actment is held in abeyance until the A. The Referendum means the refer- electorate has voted on the question. ring of a law or ordinance or any specific Q. Is the Referendum un-American ? question to the people for decision at the A. The Referendum is not un-Ameripolls.

can unless the principle of majority-rule A vote on a law or ordinance


be or rule by the people is un-American. taken, not for the purpose of decision, It is majority-rule that is important, and but merely to secure an accurate and whatever means prove necessary to sedefinite expression of public opinion. cure it must be adopted. This is a quasi-Referendum or public- So far from being un-American, the opinion vote, such as is in use in Illinois; Referendum is most emphatically Ameralso in some cities, such as Chicago and ican both in principle and practice. Detroit.

From the earliest days of our colonial The Referendum also means the right government in New England the people of the people to demand the submission not only voted directly on specific measof an enactment or measure to the voters ures but practically all the laws were made for decision; and it is also used to des- by direct vote of the citizens. This ignate a statute or constitutional amend- practice has continued in unbroken sucment securing this right.

cession so far as local or town governIn Switzerland, during the greater ment is concerned, but city and state portion of the last fifty years, the Refer- government has lost its original characendum has been a part of the constitu- ter. As the growth of numbers made tional law of the republic. When a law it necessary to rely more and more on is passed, if a certain per cent. of the representatives, the direct vote of the

*The term Direct-Legislation is here employed despotism under the form of a republic, wherein in reference to the Initiative and Referendum, be- the public servants assume the role of rulers, as was cause it is the phrase most generally used in refer- the case in the Republic of Venice under the Counring to these successful methods of maintaining cil of Ten and later under the Three Inquisitors democratic government which are employed in of State; or a despotism of wealth and privileged Switzerland and in this country also to a consider- interests, as was the case in Florence under the di able extent. A more accurate descriptive term is Medici, when that great family of bankers, to use guarded representative government. This is really the language of Professor Vallari of the Royal Inthe best name for the system as it exists in Switzer- stitute of Florence, became the absolute rulers “of land and as it is proposed for general adoption here. a republic that was keenly jealous of its liberties, It is the representative system guarded by the peo- without holding any fixed office, without suppressple's veto or Referendum and the people's right ing any previous form of government.” Guarded to propose a law, which is the Initiative. By such representative government is an evolution from the means, and only by such means can the people's less perfect system and tends to an ideal civilizasovereignty be assured and the representative sys- tion in which the people of great cities, states and tem properly guarded. It is a thoroughly prac- nations become the sovereign power and act through tical and simple method or provision for prevent- representative government. ing popular government from becoming a possible

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »