PUBLIC POLICY AND FARMERS' ORGANIZATIONS. SU 



content and more dissatisfaction between employers and employed, between labor- 

 and capital during the past ten years than there has been from like causes during 

 all our previous national history. So great has been the difficulty in some instances 

 that the strong arm of the military has been called upon to restore order and 

 maintain the peace. When we consider the harsh and inflexible conditions 

 ini])Osed by corporations over those dependent upon them, is it to be wondered 

 at, that the private individual finds himself unable to compete with the cen- 

 tralized capital of a corporation of men. Should he make an effort to do so, 

 he will find himself so surrounded by their power that there is no alternative 

 left him but to close up his private business, enter a corporation with others in 

 self defence or become the servant of one. 



The tendency is evil, and only evil ; it discourages pursuits by honest private 

 industry, and accumulates the masses in large numbers at manufacturing cen- 

 ters, where the extremes of luxury and poverty meet; Avhere you find thousands 

 of laborers employed, and not one that is able to manufacture, entire, any arti- 

 cle vipon which he works. The individual, independent mechanic is fast be- 

 coming a thing of the past. This of itself is what makes them so utterly 

 dependent upon the will of those who can shut down their works or reduce the 

 wages of their employes whenever the market does not suit, or from any other 

 cause they may see fit. 



You may say the progress of the age demands this, and point with pride to our 

 flourishing manufacturing institutions, as conducted under corporate manage- 

 ment. England points with pride to like institutions, and we point, with feelings 

 of sorrow and commiseration, to her destitute millions. We are duplicating their 

 systeni in this country at a rapid rate. It is a false progress that fosters mon- 

 opolies ; that makes aristocrats of the few, and surrounds private enterprise 

 with a rival with which it is unable to compete. To justify the system because 

 it tends to cheapen manufactured articles is poor defense, when it can be shown 

 that it tends to cheapen an article of far more importance, i. e., manhood. I 

 would sooner pay a higher price to an enterprising mechanic for the article I 

 purchase than to pay a like amount to an army of soldiers, or a force of police, 

 to protect those monopolies. 



I condemn private corporations, because they tend to demoralize to a great 

 extent all connected with them. They have their origin in one idea — that of 

 money-getting. The individual is mergad into a money machine, of which he 

 becomes a part, and he feels no remorse of conscience so long as it produces 

 gain. Men acting in a corporate capacity will claim rights and take privileges 

 that a private person would not dare to claim, and could not enforce them if 

 he did. The price of their favors is unquestioning obedience. 



According to their standard, a modern financier would be unworthy of the 

 name if he did not understand how to make the business pay dividends on 

 watered stock, representing sometimes twice the amount of cost. 



Stockholders will draw twenty per cent on their investment without any com- 

 punction, when, if you were to charge them with being twenty or thirty per 

 cent men in private business, they would take it as an insult to their manhood. 



There are, however, some enterprises that would seem to require special 

 rights and privileges, such as railroads, canals, expensive bridges and such 

 works that, on account of their magnitude, are beyond the ability of private 

 enterprise ; and even in those matters, in granting extraordinary rights to such 

 corporations the rights of the people should have been carefully guarded. But 

 have they been? Let us consider railroads for instance, and I am going to 

 admit in the start that they are a necessity of our civilization, and have con- 



