|
Can
we have one thing without the other? We might, perhaps. But does human nature
differ in different longitudes? Do the laws of production and distribution,
inexorable in their sphere as the law of gravitation in its lose their power
in a country where no rain falls in the summer time?
For years the high rate of interest and the high
rate of wages prevailing in California have been special subjects for the
lamentation of a certain school of local political economists, who could
not see that high wages and high interest were indications that the natural
wealth of the country was not yet monopolized, that great opportunities were
open to all-who did not know that these were evidences of social health, and
that it were as wise to lament them as for the maiden to wish to exchange
the natural bloom on her cheek for the interesting pallor of the invalid?
But however this be, it is certain that the tendency of the new era-the more
dense population and more thorough development of the wealth of the State-will
be to a reduction both of the rate of interest and the rate of wages, particularly
the latter. This tendency may not, probably will not, be shown immediately;
but it will be before long, and that powerfully, unless balanced and counteracted
by other influences which we are not now considering, which do not yet appear,
and which it is probable will not appear for some time yet.
The truth is, that the completion of the railroad
and the consequent great increase of business and population, will not be
a benefit to all of us, but only to a portion. As a general rule (liable of
course to exceptions) those who have it will make wealthier; for those who
have not, it will make it more difficult to get. Those who have lands, mines,
established businesses, special abilities of certain kinds, will become richer
for it and find increased opportunities; those who have only their own labor
will be come poorer, and find it harder to get ahead-first, because it will
take more capital to buy land or to get into business; and second, because
as competition reduces the wages of labor, this capital will be harder for
them to obtain.
What, for instance, does the rise in land mean?
Several things, but certainly and prominently this: that it will be harder
in future for a poor man to get a farm or a homestead lot. In some sections
of the State, land which twelve months ago could have been had for a dollar
an acre, cannot now be had for less than fifteen dollars. In other words,
the settler who last year might have had at once a farm of his own, must
now either go to work on wages for some one else, pay rent or buy on time;
in either case being compelled to give to the capitalist a large proportion
of the earnings which, had he arrived a year ago, he might have had all for
of himself. And as proprietorship is thus rendered more difficult and less
profitable to the poor, more are forced into the labor market to compete
with each other, and cut down the rate of wages-that is, to make the division
of their joint production between labor and capital more in favor of capital
and less in favor of labor.
And so in San Francisco the rise in building lots
means, that it will be harder for a poor man to get a house and lot for himself,
and if he has none that he will have to use more of his earnings for rent;
means a crowding of the poorer classes together; signifies courts, slums,
tenement-houses, squalor and vice.
San Francisco has one great advantage-there is probably
a larger proportion of her population owning homesteads and homestead lots
than in any other city of the United States. The product of the rise of real
estate will thus be more evenly distributed, and the great social and political
advantages of this diffused proprietorship cannot be overestimated. Nor can
it be too much regretted that the princely domain which San Francisco inherited
as the successor of the pueblo was not appropriated to furnishing free, or
almost free, homesteads to actual settlers, instead of being allowed to pass
into the hands of a few, to make more millionaires. Had the matter been taken
up in time and in a proper spirit, this disposition might easily have been
secured, and the great city of the future would have had a population bound
to her by the strongest ties-a population better, freer, more virtuous, independent
and public spirited than any great city the world has ever had.
To say that "Power is constantly stealing from the
many to the few," is only to state in another form the law that wealth tends
to concentration. In the new era into which the world has entered since the
application of steam, this law is more potent than ever; in the new era into
which California is entering, its operations will be more marked here than
ever before. The locomotive is a great centralizer. It kills towns and builds
up great cities, and in the same way kills little businesses and builds up
great ones. We have had comparatively but few rich men; no very rich ones,
in the meaning "very rich" has in these times. But the process is going on.
The great city that is to be will have its Astors, Vanderbilts, Stewarts
and Spragues, and he who looks a few years ahead may even now read their
names as he passes along Montgomery, California or Front streets.-With the
protection which property gets in modern times-with stocks, bonds, burglar-proof
safes and policemen; with the railroad and the telegraph after a man gets
a certain amount of money it is plain sailing, and he need take no risks.
Astor said that to get his first thousand dollars was his toughest struggle;
but when one gets a million, if he has ordinary prudence, how much he will
have is only a question of life. Nor can we rely on the absence of laws of
primogeniture and entail to dissipate these large fortunes so menacing to
the general weal. Any large fortune will, of course, become dissipated in
time, even in spite of laws of primogeniture and entail; but every aggregation
of wealth implies and necessitates others, and so that the aggregations remain,
it matters little in what particular hands. Stewart, in the natural course
of things, will die before long, and being childless, his wealth will be
dissipated, or at least go out of the dry goods business. But will this avail
the smaller dealers whom he has crushed or is crushing out? Not at all. Some
one else will step in, take his place in the trade, and run the great money-making
machine which he has organized, or some other similar one.
Stewart and other great houses have concentrated
the business, and it will remain concentrated. Nor is it worth while to shut
our eyes to the effects of this concentration of wealth. One millionaire involves
the little existence of just so many proletarians. It is the great tree and
the saplings over again. We need not look far from the palace to find the
hovel. When people can charter special steamboats to take them to watering
places, pay four thousand dollars for the summer rental of a cottage, build
marble stables for their horses, and give dinner parties which cost by the
thousand dollars a head, we may know that there are poor girls on the streets
pondering between starvation and dishonor.
When liveries appear, look out for bare-footed children.
A few liveries are now to be seen on our streets; we think their appearance
coincides in date with the establishment of the almshouse. They are few,
plain and modest now; they will grow more numerous and gaudy-and then we
will not wait long for the children-their corollaries.
But there is another side: we are to become a great,
populous, wealthy community. And in such a community many good things are
possible that are not possible in a community such as ours has been. There
have been artists, scholars, and men of special knowledge and ability among
us, who could and some of whom have since won distinction and wealth in older
and larger cities, but who here could only make a living by digging sand,
peddling vegetables, or washing dishes in restaurants. It will not be so
in the San Francisco of the future. We shall keep such men with us, and reward
them, instead of driving them away. We shall have our noble charities, great
museums, libraries and universities; a class of men who have leisure for
thought and culture; magnificent theatres and opera houses; parks and pleasure
gardens.
We shall develop a literature of our own, issue
books which will be read wherever the English language is spoken, and maintain
periodicals which will rank with those of the East and Europe. The Bulletin,
Times and Alta, good as they are, must become, or must yield to, journals
of the type of the New York Herald or the Chicago Tribune. The railroads
which will carry the San Francisco newspapers over a wide extent of country
the same day that they are issued, will place them on a par, or almost on
a par in point of time, with journals printed in the interior, while their
metropolitan circulation and business will enable them to publish more and
later news than interior papers can.
The same law of concentration will work in other
businesses in the same way. The railroads may benefit Sacramento and Stockton
by making of them workshops, but no one will stop there to buy goods when
he can go to San Francisco, make his choice from larger stocks, and return
the same day.
But again comes the question: will this California
of the future, with its facilities for travel and transportation; its huge
metropolis and pleasant watering places; its noble literature and great newspapers;
universities, libraries and museums; parks and operas; fleets of yachts and
miles of villas, possess still the charme which makes Californians prefer
their State, even as it is, to places where all these things are to be found?
What constitutes the peculiar charm of California,
which all who have lived here long enough feel? Not the climate alone. Heresy
though it be to say so, there are climates as good; some that on the whole
are better. Not merely that there is less social restraint, for there are
parts of the Union and parts from which tourists occasionally come to lecture
us where there is much less social restraint than in California. Not simply
that the opportunities of making money have been better here; for the opportunities
for making large fortunes have not been so good as in some other places,
and there are many who have not made money here, who prefer this country
to any other; many who after leaving us throw away certainty of profit to
return and "take the chances" of California. It certainly is not in the growth
of local attachment, for the Californian has even less local attachment than
the average American, and will move about from one end of the State to the
other with perfect indifference. It is not that we have the culture or the
opportunities to gratify luxurious and cultivated tastes that older countries
afford, and yet those who leave us on this account as a general thing come
back again.
No: the potent charm of California, which all feel
but few analyze, has been more in the character, habits and modes of thought
of her people-called forth by the peculiar conditions of the young State-than
in anything else. In California there has been a certain cosmopolitanism,
a certain freedom and breadth of common thought and feeling, natural to a
community made up from so many different sources, to which every man and
woman had been transplanted-all travellers to some extent, and with native
angularities of prejudice and habit more or less worn off. Then there has
been a feeling of personal independence and equality, a general hopefulness
and self-reliance, and a certain large-heartedness and open-handedness which
were born of the comparative evenness with which property was distributed,
the high standard of wages and of comfort, and the latent feeling of every
one that he might "make a strike," and certainly could not be kept down long.
While we have had no very rich class, we have had
no really poor class. There have been enough "dead brokes," and how many
Californians are there who have not gone through that experience; but there
never was a better country to be "broken" in, and where almost every man,
even the most successful, had been in the same position, it did not involve
the humiliation and loss of hope which attaches to utter poverty in older
and more settled communities.
In a country where all had started from the same
level-where the banker had been a year or two before a journeyman carpenter,
the merchant a foremast hand; the restaurant waiter had perhaps been educated
for the bar or the church, and the laborer once counted his "pile," and where
the wheel of fortune had been constantly revolving with a rapidity in other
places unknown, social lines could not be sharply drawn, nor a reverse dispirit.
There was something in the great possibilities of the country; in the feeling
that it was one of immense latent wealth; which furnished a background of
which a better filled and more thoroughly developed country is destitute,
and which contributed not a little to the active, generous, independent social
tone.
The characteristics of the principal business-mining-gave
a color to all California thought and feeling. It fostered a reckless, generous,
independent spirit, with a strong disposition to " take chances" and "trust
to luck." Than the placer mining, no more independent business could be conceived.
The miner working for himself, owned no master; worked when and only when
he pleased; took out his earnings each day in the shining particles which
depended for their value on no fluctuations of the market, but would pass
current and supply all wants the world over. When his claim gave out, or
for any reason he desired to move, he had but to shoulder his pick and move
on. Mining of this kind developed its virtues as well as its vices. If it
could have been united with ownership of land and the comforts and restraints
of home, it would have given us a class of citizens of the utmost value to
a republican state. But the "honest miner" of the placers has passed away
in California. The Chinaman, the millioner and his laborers, the mine superintendent
and his gang, are his successors.
This crowding of people into immense cities, this
aggregation of wealth into large lumps, this marshalling of men into big
gangs under the control of the great "captains of industry," does not tend
to foster personal independence-the basis of all virtues-nor will it tend
to preserve the characteristics which particularly have made Californians
proud of their State. However, we shall have some real social gains, with
some that are only apparent. We shall have more of home influences, a deeper
religious sentiment, less of the unrest that is bred of an adventurous and
reckless life. We shall have fewer shooting and stabbing affrays, but we
will have probably something worse, from which, thank God, we have hitherto
been exempt-the low, brutal, cowardly rowdyism of the great Eastern cities.
We shall hear less of highway robberies in the mountains, but more, perhaps,
of pickpockets, burglars and sneak thieves. That we can look forward to any
political improvement is, to say the least,-doubtful. There is nothing in
the changes which are coming that of itself promises that. There will be
a more permanent population, more who will look on California as their home;
but we would not aver that there will be a larger proportion of the population
who will take an intelligent interest in public affairs. In San Francisco
the political future is full of danger. As surely as San Francisco is destined
to become as large as New York, as certain is it that her political condition
is destined to become as bad as that of New York, unless her citizens are
aroused in time to the necessity of preventive or rather palliative measures.
And in the growth of large corporations and other special interests is an
element of great danger. Of these great corporations and interests we shall
have many. Look, for instance, at the Central Pacific Railroad Company, as
it will be, with a line running to Salt Lake, controlling more capital and
employing more men than any of the great eastern railroads who manage legislatures
as they manage their workshops, and name governors, senators and judges almost
as they name their own engineers clerks! Can we rely upon sufficient intelligence,
independence and virtue among the many to resist the political effects of
the concentration of great wealth in the hands of a few?
And this in general is the tendency of the time,
and of the new era opening before us: to the great development of wealth;
to concentration; to the differentiation of classes; to less personal independence
among the many and the greater power of the few. We shall lose much which
gave a charm to California life; much that was valuable in the character
of our people, while we will also wear off defects, and gain some things
that we lacked.
With our gains and our losses will come new duties
and new responsibilities. Connected more closely with the rest of the nation,
we will feel more quickly and keenly all that affects it. We will have to
deal, in time, with all the social problems that are forcing themselves on
older communities, (like the riddles of a Sphinx, which not to answer is
death) with one of them, the labor question, rendered peculiarly complex
by our proximity to Asia. Public spirit, public virtue, the high resolve
of men and women who are capable of feeling the "enthusiasm of humanity,"
will be need ed in the future more than ever.
A great change is coming over our State. We should
not prevent it if we could, and could not if we would, but we can view it
in all its bearings-look at the dark as well as the bright side, and endeavor
to hasten that which is good and retard or prevent that which is bad. A great
State is forming; let us see to it that its foundations are laid firm and
true.
And as California becomes populous rich, let us
not forget that the character of a people counts for more than their numbers;
that the distribution of wealth is even a more important matter than its
production. Let us not imagine ourselves in a fools' paradise, where the
golden apples will drop into our mouths; let us not think that after the
stormy seas and head gales of all the ages, our ship has at last struck the
trade winds of time. The future of our State, of our nation, of our race,
looks fair and bright; perhaps the future looked so to the philosophers who
once sat in the porches of Athens-to the unremembered men who-raised the
cities whose ruins lie south of us. Our modern civilization strikes broad
and deep and looks high. So did the tower which men once built almost unto
heaven.
|