THE RELATION OF WEALTH TO MORALS
BY THE RIGHT REVEREND WILLIAM LAWRENCE,
BISHOP OF MASSACHUSETTS
History seems to support us in our distrust. Visions arise of their fall from splendor of Tyre and Sidon, Babylon, Rome, and Venice, and of great nations too. The question is started whether England is not to-day, in the pride of her wealth and power, sowing the wind from which in time she will reap the whirlwind.
Experience seems to add its support. Is it not from the ranks of the poor that the leaders of the people have always risen? Recall Abraham Lincoln and patriots of every generation.
The Bible has sustained the same note. Were ever stronger words of warning uttered against the deceitfulness of riches than those spoken by the peasant Jesus, who Himself had no place to lay His head? And the Church has through the centuries upheld poverty as one of the surest paths to Heaven: it has been a mark of the saint.
To be sure, in spite of history, experience, and the Bible, men have gone on their way making money and hailing with joy each age of material prosperity. The answer is: "This only proves the case; men are of the world, riches are deceitful, and the Bible is true; the world is given over to Mammon. In the increase of material wealth and the accumulation of riches the man who seeks the higher life has no part."
In the face of this comes the statement of the chief statistician of our census--from one, therefore, who speaks with authority: "The present census, when completed, will unquestionably show that the visible material wealth in this country now has a value of ninety billion dollars. This is an addition since 1890 of twenty-five billion dollars. This is a saving greater than all the people of the Western Continent had been able to make from the discovery of Columbus to the breaking out of the Civil War."
If our reasoning from history, experience, and the Bible is correct, we, a Christian people, have rubbed a sponge over the pages of the Bible and are in for orgies and a downfall to which the fall of Rome is a very tame incident.
May it not be well, however, to revise our inferences from history, experience, and the Bible? History tells us that, while riches have been an item and an indirect cause of national decay, innumerable other conditions entered in. Therefore, while wealth has been a source of danger, it has not necessarily led to demoralization.
That leaders have sprung from the ranks of the poor is true and always will be true, so long as force of character exists in every class. But there are other conditions than a lack of wealth at the source of their uprising.
And as to the Bible: while every word that can be quoted
against the rich is as true as any other word, other words and deeds
are as true; and the parables of our Lord on the stewardship of
wealth, His association with the wealthy, strike another and
complementary note. Both notes are essential to the harmony of His
life and teachings. His thought was not of the conditions, rich or
poor, but of a higher life, the character rising out of the
conditions--fortunately, for we are released from that subtle
hypocrisy which has beset the Christian through the ages, bemoaning
the deceitfulness of riches and, at the same time, working with all
his might to earn a competence, and a fortune if he can.
The first is that man, when he is strong, will conquer Nature, open up her and harness them to his service. This is his play, his exercise, his divine mission.
"Man," says Emerson, "is born to be rich. He is thoroughly related, and is tempted out by his appetites and fancies to the conquest of this and that piece of Nature, until he finds his well-being in the use ot the planet, and of more planets than his own. Wealth requires, besides the crust of bread and the roof, the freedom of the city, the freedom of the earth." "The strong race is strong on these terms."
Man draws to himself material wealth as surely, as
naturally, and as necessarily as the oak draws the elements into
itself from the earth.
Put two men in adjoining fields, one man strong and normal, the other weak and listless. One picks up his spade, turns over the earth and works till sunset. The other turns over a few clods, gets a drink from the spring, takes a nap, and loafs back to his work. In a few years one will be rich for his needs and the other a pauper dependent on the first, and growling at his prosperity.
Put ten thousand immoral men to live and work in one fertile valley and ten thousand moral men to live and work in the next valley and the question is soon answered as to who wins the material wealth. Godliness is in league with riches.
Now we return with an easier mind and clearer conscience to the problem of our twenty-five billion dollars in a decade.
My question is: Is the material prosperity of this Nation favorable or unfavorable to the morality of the people?
The first thought is, Who has prospered? Who has got the money?
I take it that the loudest answer would be, The
millionaires, the capitalists, and the incompetent but luxurious
rich; and, as we think of that twenty-five billion, our thoughts run
over the yachts, the palaces, and the luxuries that flaunt
themselves before the public.
Now we are beginning to get an idea as to where the savings are. They are in the hands of hundreds of thousands of just such men, and of scores of thousands of men whose incomes ten years ago were two and five thousand, and are now five and ten thousand; and of thousands of others whose incomes have risen from ten to thirty thousand. So that, when you get to the multi-millionaires, you have only a fraction to distribute among them. And of them the fact is that only a small fraction of their income can be spent upon their own pleasure and luxury; the bulk of what they get has to be reinvested, and becomes the means whereby thousands earn their wages. They are simply trustees of a fraction of the national property.
When, then, the question is asked, "Is the material prosperity of this nation favorable or unfavorable to the morality of the people?" I say with all emphasis, "In the long run, and by all means, favorable!"
In other words, to seek for and earn wealth is a sign of a natural, vigorous, and strong character. Wherever strong men are, there they will turn into the activities of life. In the ages of chivalry you will find them on the crusades or seeking the Golden Fleece; in college life you will find them high in rank, in the boat, or on the athletic field; in an industrial age you will find them eager, straining every nerve in the development of the great industries. The race is to the strong. The search for material wealth is therefore as natural and necessary to the man as is the pushing out of its roots for more moisture and food to the oak. This is man's play, his exercise, the expression of his powers, his personality. You can no more suppress it than you can suppress the tide of the ocean. For one man who seeks money for its own sake there are ten who seek it for the satisfaction of the seeking, the power there is in it, and the use they can make of it. There is the exhilaration of feeling one's self grow in one's surroundings; the man reaches out, lays hold of this, that, and the other interest, scheme, and problem. He is building up a fortune? Yes, but his joy is also that he is building up a stronger, abler, and more powerful man. There are two men that have none of this ambition: the gilded, listless youth and the ragged, listless pauper to whom he tosses a dime; they are in the same class.
We are now ready to take up the subject in a little more detail. How is it favorable? The parable of my Irish friend gives the answer.
In the first place, and as I have already sug- gested, the
effort to make his living and add to his comforts and power gives
free play to a man's activities and leads to a development of his
faculties. In an age and country where the greater openings are in
commercial lines, there the stronger men and the mass of them will
move. It is not a question of worldliness or of love of money, but
of the natural use and legitimate play of men's faculties. An effort
to suppress this action is not a religious duty, but a disastrous
error, sure to fail.
With this comes also the power of self-mastery. The savage eats what he kills and spends what he has. In the movement towards civilization through material wealth, questions come up for decision every hour. Shall I spend? Shall I save? How shall I spend? How can I earn more? Shall I go into partnership with a capital of ten dollars, or shall I wait until I have fifty dollars?
Wage earners are not to-day, as they were in earlier days, hungering for the bare physical necessities of life. They are hungering now, and it marks an upward movement in civilization, for higher things, education, social life, relaxation, and the development of the higher faculties.
To be sure, a certain fraction wilt under the strain, take to drink, to lust, to laziness. There is always the thin line of stragglers behind every army, but the great body of the American people are marching upwards in prosperity through the mastery of their lower tastes and passions to the development of the higher. From rags to clothes, from filth to cleanliness, from disease to health; from bare walls to pictures; from ignorance to education; from narrow and petty talk to books and music and art; from superstition to a more rational religion; from crudity to refinement; from self-centralization to the conception of a social unity.
Here in this last phrase we strike the next step in development. In this increase of wealth, this rapid communication which goes with it, this shrinking of the earth's surface and unifying of peoples through commerce, men and women are realizing their relations to society.
That there are those who in the deepest poverty, sustain the spirit of unselfishness and exhibit a self-sacrifice for others which puts their richer neighbors to the blush we know by experience. At the same time, the fact is that for the mass and in the long run grinding poverty does grind down the character: in the struggle for bare existence and for the very life of one's children there is developed an intense self-centralization and a hardness which is destructive of the social instinct and of the finer graces. When, however, through the increase of wealth man has extended his interests, his vision, and his opportunities, "he is thoroughly related." His lines run out in every direction; he lays his finger upon all the broader interests of life, the school, the church, and the college. He reaches through commerce to the ends of the earth. He discovers one bond which is essential to the social unity in this commercial age--the bond of faith in other men; for in credit, on belief in others, our whole social and commercial fabric is built. And when a man has reached this point, he has indeed reached one of the high plateaus of character: from this rise the higher mountain peaks of Christian graces, but here he is on the standing-ground of the higher civilization.
As I write I can almost feel the silent protest of some critics. Are not these qualities, self-respect, self-mastery, a sense of social unity, and mutual confidence, the common- places of life? Is this the only response of material wealth in its relation to morality?
These are to us now the commonplaces of life: they are at the same time the fundamentals of character and of morality. If material prosperity has been one of the great instruments (and I believe it has) in bringing the great body of our people even to approach this plateau of character, it has more than justified itself.
One might, however, mention other and finer qualities that
follow in these days the train of prosperity. I instance only one.
We will strike up one mountain peak: it is that of joyful and
I have in mind now a man of wealth (you can conjure up many like him) who lives handsomely and entertains; he has everything that purveys to his health and comfort. All these things are tributary to what? To the man's efficiency in his complete devotion to the social, educational, and charitable interests to which he gives his life. He is Christ's as much as was St. Paul, he is consecrated as was St. Francis of Assisi; and in recognition of the bounty with which God has blessed him he does not sell all that he has, but he uses all that he has, and, as he believes, in the wisest way, for the relief of the poor, the upbuilding of social standards, and the upholding of righteousness among the people. The Christian centuries, with all their asceticism and monasticism, with their great and noble saints, have, I believe, never witnessed a sweeter, more gracious, and more complete consecration than that which exists in the lives of hundreds of men and women in the cities and towns of this country, who, out of a sense of grateful service to God for His bounty, are giving themselves with all joy to the welfare of the people. And if ever Christ's words have been obeyed to the letter, they are obeyed to-day by those who are living out His precepts of the stewardship of wealth.
As we think of the voluntary and glad service given to society, to the State, the Church, to education, art, andcharity, of the army of able men and women who, without thought of pay, are serving upon directories of savings banks and national banks, life insurance companies, railroads, mills, trusts and corporations, public commissions, and offices of all sorts, schools and colleges, churches and charities; as we run our thoughts over the free services of the doctors, of the lawyers, for their poorer clients, we are amazed at the magnitude of unpaid service, which is now taken for granted, and at the cheerful and glad spirit in which it is carried through. Material prosperity is helping to make the national character sweeter, more joyous, more unselfish, more Christlike. That is my answer to the question as to the relation of material prosperity to morality.
Again I feel a silent protest. Is not the writer going rather far? We did not believe that our twenty-five billions would lead to orgies; but is he not getting rather close to the millennium? Are there no shadows and dark spaces in the radiance which he seems to think that wealth is shedding around us?
Yes, my friendly critic, there are, and to a mention of a
few of them I give the pages that are left.
We know how that was in England: we remember the report of the Commission by Lord Shaftesbury as to the horrible condition of the miners, men, women, and children.
That was simply one phase in the development of the great
movement of modern industrialism. It was a neglect and forgetfulness
under a new pressure, rather than deliberate cruelty. The facts once
known, attention called, and reforms began; and they have been going
on in behalf of the working people ever since. Much, very much, has
Ephemeral success sometimes follows deceit, and that breeds a body of commercial frauds; but they cannot endure. A fortune is won by an unscrupulous adventurer; and a hundred fortunes are lost and characters spoiled in trying to follow suit. An ignorant man happens upon wealth or by some mysterious commercial ability wins wealth, and he then thinks himself omniscient. He, not God, is his own creator. He goes to church, but he is Godless. When a nation of people have been seeking for clothes, houses, and comforts in the upbuilding of civilization, is it any wonder that they do not realize that a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of things that he possesseth? There are deceit, hardness, materialism, and vulgarity in the commercial world; and to me the vulgarest of all is not the diamond-studded operator, but the horde of mothers crushing each other around the bargain counter in their endeavor to get something, and that so small, for nothing. The worst of commercialism is that it does not stop at the office, but enters the home, taints the marriage vow, and poisons social life at its springs.
Beyond these rudimentary forms of commercialism, there is another, even more dangerous, because it threatens the liberties and rights of the people. The eye of the public is on it now. I refer to the reation of concentrated masses of wealth to the public service.
I have no time to more than suggest a few of the conditions
that have led up to this. Industrial enterprise has drawn many of
the strongest and ablest men from political to commercial interests;
society and legislation now do for the people what in other days the
landlord did; they are concerned more and more with industrial,
commercial, and financial questions, from the national tariff to the
size of a house-drain. Just at this time, and because of our great
industrial development and prosperity, a horde of ignorant voters
waiting to be moulded by any strong leader have come to this shore.
The wide distribution of wealth has driven merchants and mechanics,
widows and trustees of orphans, doctors and ministers, to invest
their savings in great enterprises, corporations, and trusts, which,
to succeed, must be directed by a few men. We have therefore this
situation: a few men responsible for the safekeeping and development
of enormous properties, dependent upon legislation, and a great mass
of voters, many of them ignorant, represented by their own kind in
city or state government, strongly organized by a leader who is in
it for what he can get out of it, and who is ever alert with his
legislative cohorts to "strike" the great corporations. The people
believe that the officers of great corporations so manage that they
can get what they want, call it by assessment, bribery, ransom, or
what you will, and they brand those otherwise respectable men as
cowards and traitors to public liberty.
This is very much the position of the great trustees of capital, the heads of our great corporations, at the hands of the modern bandit. Shall they jeopardize the income of women and children, merchants and mechanics, and perhaps drive them into poverty? Or shall they accept the situation, yield to the threat, and trust to the authorities to seize the robber, or through an aroused public opinion so to vote, act, and legislate as to change the law and stop this modern brigandage? That some of the promoters and managers of great corporations are unscrupulous is undoubtedly true. The jail is none too good for them, if only the law would touch them. Nor have we a word of apology or justification for any man who yields to or encourages blackmail. The difficulty, however, is not a simple one. It concerns more than the directors and the politicians; it relates to the rights and liberties of the people. I do not have so much fear of the rich man in office, as I do of the poor but weak man in office and the rich man outside. Through the interplay of aroused public opinion, better legislation, and intelligent action, the relief will come. A younger generation, with its eye keen upon that danger-point, is coming to the front.
In some cities of China the houses have no windows on the street, only bare walls and the little door. The families are isolated, narrow, and selfish: there is no public spirit. When the Chinese boy returns home from his Christian Mission School, touched with the spirit of Christian civilization, his first work in bringing civilization to his home is to take a crowbar, knock a hole in the front wall, and make a window, that he may peer out and people see in. He unifies society and creates a public opinion. What is needed as our next step in civilization is to break a hole and make a window that the public may see into the great corporations and trusts and, what is just as important, that the managers may see out and recognize the sentiment of the public.
Light and action--heroic action! There are men to-day waiting and wanting to act, to throw off the shackles of the modern bandit; but they dare not alone: their trusts are too great. What is wanted is a group of men, high in position, great in power, who at great cost, if need be, will stand and say, "Thus far, up to the lines of the nicest honor, shalt thou go, and no farther."
The people have their eye upon the public service. An
administration may pay political debts by pushing ignorant and
unworthy men into the lower offices, but when it comes to filling
positions of great responsibility the President could not, and would
not if he could, appoint men less worthy than Wood in Cuba, Allen in
Porto Rico, and Taft in the Philippines, men of force, intelligence,
and character. Collegiate education does not insure character, but
it does sift men and insure intelligence; and, as President
Pritchett of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology pointed out
in his inaugural address, though less than one per cent of our
population are college men, yet from this very small fraction a
majority of the legislative, executive, and judicial places of the
General Government which have to do in any large way with shaping
the policy and determining the character of the government, are
With all this said, the great mass of the people are self-restrained and simple. Material prosperity has come apace, and on the whole it uplifts. Responsibility sobers men and nations. We have learned how to win wealth: we are learning how to use and spend it. Every year marks a long step in advance in material prosperity, and character must march in step. Without wealth, character is liable to narrow and harden. Without character, wealth will destroy. Wealth is upon us, increasing wealth. The call of to-day is, then, for the uplift of character, the support of industry, education, art, and every means of culture; the encouragement of the higher life; and, above all, the deepening of the religious faith of the people; the rekindling of the spirit, that, clothed with her material forces, the great personality of this Nation may fulfil her divine destiny.
I have been clear, I trust, in my opinion that material prosperity is in the long run favorable to morality. Let me be as clear in the statement of that eternal truth, that neither a man's nor a nation's life consists in the abundance of things that he possesseth.
In the investment of wealth in honest enterprise and
business, lies our path of character. In the investment of wealth in
all that goes towards the uplift of the people in education, art,
and religion is another path of character. Above all, and first of
all, stands the personal life. The immoral rich man is a traitor to
himself, to his material as well as spiritual interests. Material
prosperity is upon us; it is marching with us. Character must keep
step, aye, character must lead. We want great riches; we want also