At a dinner given to Andrew Carnegie by the Authors' League
in New York, he said: "They say I am a philanthropist. I am
no such foolish fellow." Nevertheless, to the _North
American Review_ for December, 1889, he contributed an
article, entitled "The Best Fields for Philanthropy," in
which he gives the Library first place. It is of course
impossible to tell whether the title was his or a suggestion
of the editor. The extract printed here is interesting as
embodying Mr. Carnegie's gospel of "help by self-help," but
also as giving credit to Enoch Pratt of Baltimore as an
earlier exponent of it.
Andrew Carnegie was born in Dunfermline, Scotland, Nov. 25,
1835. He was brought by his family to Pittsburgh, Pa. as a
boy of 13, and after working as a weaver's assistant and a
telegraph messenger boy, became an operator, rose to be head
of his division, made money by organizing a sleeping-car
company and after the Civil War became an ironmaster,
retiring in 1901 as a multi-millionaire. Much of his fortune
he gave to build libraries, almost always on the condition
that the municipality should assure them a stated support.
He died in New York, Aug. 11, 1919.
The reception given to the first paper[1] upon this subject, to which
our lamented friend, the late editor and proprietor of this _Review_,
was pleased to give the first place in the June number, has been most
encouraging to its author, as it would surely have been to the editor
had he been spared, for he was most deeply interested in the subject.
[1] "Wealth" by Andrew Carnegie. In the North American Review, June,
1889.
* * * * *
Before entering upon the question which you have proposed, it may be
advantageous to restate the positions taken in the former paper, for the
benefit of those who may not have read it, or who cannot conveniently
refer to it. It was assumed that the present laws of competition,
accumulation, and distribution are the best obtainable conditions; that
through these the race receives its most valuable fruits; and,
therefore, that they should be accepted and upheld. Under these it was
held that great wealth must inevitably flow into the hands of the few
exceptional managers of men. The question then arose, What should these
do with their surplus wealth? and the "Gospel of Wealth" contended that
surplus wealth should be considered as a sacred trust, to be
administered during the lives of its owners, by them as trustees, for
the best good of the community in which and from which it had been
acquired.
It was pointed out that there were but three modes of disposing of
surplus wealth, and two of these were held to be improper. First, it was
held that to leave great fortunes to children did not prove true
affection for them or interest in their genuine good, regarded either as
individuals or as members of the state; that it was not the welfare of
the children, but the pride of the parents, which inspired enormous
legacies, and that, looking to the usual results of vast sums conferred
upon children, the thoughtful man must be forced to say, if the good of
the child only were considered: "I would as soon leave to my son a curse
as to leave to him the almighty dollar."
The second mode open to men is to hoard their surplus wealth during
life, and leave it at death for public uses. It was pointed out that in
many cases these bequests become merely monuments of the testators'
folly; that the amount of real good done by posthumous gifts was
ridiculously disproportionate to the sums thus left. The recent decision
upon Mr. Tilden's will, which is said to have been drawn by the ablest
of lawyers, and the partial failure of Mr. Williamson's purposes in
regard to the great technical school which that millionaire intended to
establish in Philadelphia, are lessons indeed for the rich who only
bequeath.
The aim of the first article was thus to lead up to the conclusion that
there is but one right mode of using enormous fortunes--namely, that the
possessors from time to time during their own lives so administer them
as to promote the permanent good of the communities from which they have
been gathered. It was held that public sentiment would soon say of one
who died possessed of millions of available wealth which he might have
administered: "The man who dies thus rich dies disgraced."
The purpose of this article is to present some of the best methods of
performing this duty of administering surplus wealth for the good of the
people. The first requisite for a really good use of wealth by the
millionaire who has accepted the gospel which proclaims him only a
trustee of the surplus that comes to him, is to take care that the
purpose for which he spends it shall not have a degrading, pauperizing
tendency upon its recipients, and that his trust should be so
administered as to stimulate the best and most aspiring poor of the
community to further efforts for their own improvement. It is not the
irreclaimably destitute, shiftless, and worthless that it is truly
beneficial or truly benevolent to attempt to reach and improve. For
these there exists the refuge provided by the city or the state, where
they can be sheltered, fed, clothed, and kept in comfortable existence,
and--most important of all--where they can be isolated from the
well-doing and industrious poor, who are liable to be demoralized by
contact with these unfortunates. One man or woman who succeeds in living
comfortably by begging is more dangerous to society, and a greater
obstacle to the progress of humanity, than a score of wordy Socialists.
The individual administrator of surplus wealth has as his charge the
industrious and ambitious; not those who need everything done for them,
but those who, being most anxious and able to help themselves, deserve
and will be benefited by help from others and the extension of their
opportunities at the hands of the philanthropic rich.
It is ever to be remembered that one of the chief obstacles which the
philanthropist meets in his efforts to do real and permanent good in
this world is the practice of indiscriminate giving; and the duty of the
millionaire is to resolve to cease giving to objects that are not proved
clearly to his satisfaction to be deserving. He must remember Mr. Rice's
belief, that nine hundred and fifty out of every thousand dollars
bestowed to-day upon so-called charity had better be thrown into the
sea. As far as my experience of the wealthy extends, it is unnecessary
to urge them to give of their superabundance in charity so-called.
Greater good for the race is to be achieved by inducing them to cease
impulsive and injurious giving. As a rule, the sins of millionaires in
this respect are not those of omission, but of commission, because they
will not take time to think, and chiefly because it is much easier to
give than to refuse. Those who have surplus wealth give millions every
year which produce more evil than good, and which really retard the
progress of the people, because most of the forms in vogue to-day for
benefiting mankind only tend to spread among the poor a spirit of
dependence upon alms, when what is essential for progress is that they
should be inspired to depend upon their own exertions. The miser
millionaire who hoards his wealth does less injury to society than the
careless millionaire who squanders his unwisely, even if he does so
under cover of the mantle of sacred charity. The man who gives to the
individual beggar commits a grave offence, but there are many societies
and institutions soliciting alms which it is none the less injurious to
the community to aid. These are as corrupting as individual beggars.
Plutarch's "Morals" contains this lesson: "A beggar asking an alms of a
Lacedaemonian, he said: 'Well, should I give thee anything, thou wilt be
the greater beggar, for he that first gave thee money made thee idle,
and is the cause of this base and dishonorable way of living.'" As I
know them, there are few millionaires, very few indeed, who are clear of
this sin of having made beggars.
Bearing in mind these considerations, let us endeavor to present some of
the best uses to which a millionaire can devote the surplus of which he
should regard himself as only the trustee.
_First_--Standing apart by itself there is the founding of a university
by men enormously rich, such men as must necessarily be few in any
country. Perhaps the greatest sum ever given by an individual for any
purpose is the gift of Senator Stanford, who undertakes to establish
upon the Pacific coast, where he amassed his enormous fortune, a
complete university, which is said to involve the expenditure of ten
millions of dollars, and upon which he may be expected to bestow twenty
millions of his surplus. He is to be envied. A thousand years hence some
orator, speaking his praise upon the then crowded shores of the Pacific,
may repeat Griffith's eulogy of Wolsey, "In bestowing he was most
princely: ever witness for him this great seat of learning." Here is a
noble use of wealth.
We have many such institutions, Hopkins, Cornell, Packer, and others,
but most of these have only been bequeathed, and it is impossible to
extol any man greatly for simply leaving what he cannot take with him.
Cooper, and Pratt, and Stanford, and others of this class deserve credit
and the admiration of their fellows as much for the time and the
attention given during their lives, as for their expenditure, upon their
respective monuments.
We cannot have the Pacific coast in mind without recalling another
important work of a different character which has recently been
established there, the Lick Observatory. If any millionaire be
interested in the ennobling study of astronomy,--and there should be and
would be such if they but gave the subject the slightest
attention,--here is an example which could well be followed, for the
progress made in astronomical instruments and appliances is so great and
continuous that every few years a new telescope might be judiciously
given to one of the observatories upon this continent, the last being
always the largest and the best, and certain to carry further and
further the knowledge of the universe and of our relation to it here
upon the earth. As one among many of the good deeds of the late Mr.
Thaw, of Pittsburg, his constant support of the observatory there may be
mentioned. This observatory enabled Professor Langley to make his
wonderful discoveries. The professor is now at the head of the
Smithsonian Institution, a worthy successor to Professor Henry.
Connected with him was Mr. Brashear, of Pittsburg, whose instruments are
in most of the principal observatories of the world. He was a common
millwright, but Mr. Thaw recognized his genius and was his main support
through trying days. This common workman has been made a professor by
one of the foremost scientific bodies of the world. In applying part of
his surplus in aiding these two now famous men, the millionaire Thaw did
a noble work. Their joint labors have brought great, and are destined to
bring still greater, credit upon their country in every scientific
centre throughout the world.
It is reserved for very few to found universities, and, indeed, the use
for many, or perhaps any, new universities does not exist. More good is
henceforth to be accomplished by adding to and extending those in
existence. But in this department a wide field remains for the
millionaire as distinguished from the Croesus among milionaires. The
gifts to Yale University have been many, but there is plenty of room for
others. The School of Fine Arts, founded by Mr. Street, the Sheffield
Scientific School, endowed by Mr. Sheffield, and Professor Loomis's fund
for the observatory, are fine examples. Mrs. C.J. Osborne's building for
reading and recitation to be regarded with especial pleasure as being
the wise gift of a woman. Harvard University has not been forgotten; the
Peabody Museum, and the halls of Wells, Matthews, and Thayer may be
cited. Sever Hall is worthy of special mention, as showing what a genius
like Richardson could do with the small sum of a hundred thousand
dollars. The Vanderbilt University at Nashville, Tennessee, may be
mentioned as a true product of the gospel of wealth. It was established
by members of the Vanderbilt family during their lives--mark this vital
feature--during their lives; for nothing counts for much that is left by
a man at his death. Such funds are torn from him, not given by him. If
any millionaire is at a loss to know how to accomplish great and
indisputable good with his surplus, here is a field which can never be
fully occupied, for the wants of our universities increase with the
development of the country.
_Second_--The result of my own study of the question, What is the best
gift which can be given to a community? is that a free library occupies
the first place, provided the community will accept and maintain it as a
public institution, as much a part of the city property as its public
schools, and, indeed, an adjunct to these. It is, no doubt, possible
that my own personal experience may have led me to value a free library
beyond all other forms of beneficence. When I was a boy in Pittsburg,
Colonel Anderson, of Allegheny,--a name I can never speak without
feelings of devotional gratitude,--opened his little library of four
hundred books to boys. Every Saturday afternoon he was in attendance
himself at his house to exchange books. No one but he who has felt it
can know the intense longing with which the arrival of Saturday was
awaited, that a new book might be had. My brother and Mr. Phipps, who
have been my principal business partners through life, shared with me
Colonel Anderson's precious generosity, and it was when revelling in
these treasures that I resolved, if ever wealth came to me, that it
should be used to establish free libraries, that other poor boys might
receive opportunities similar to those for which we were indebted to
that noble man.
Great Britain has been foremost in appreciating the value of free
libraries for its people. Parliament passed an act permitting towns and
cities to establish and maintain these as municipal institutions, and
whenever the people of any town or city voted to accept the provisions
of the act, the authorities were authorized to tax the community to the
extent of one penny in the pound valuation. Most of the towns already
have free libraries under this act. Many of these are the gifts of rich
men, whose funds have been used for the building, and in some cases for
the books also, the communities being required to maintain and to
develop the libraries; and to this feature I attribute most of their
usefulness. An endowed institution is liable to become the prey of a
clique. The public ceases to take interest, in it, or, rather, never
acquires interest in it. The rule has been violated which requires the
recipients to help themselves. Everything has been done for the
community instead of its being only helped to help itself.
Many free libraries have been established in our country, but none that
I know of with such wisdom as the Pratt Library, of Baltimore. Mr. Pratt
presented to the city of Baltimore one million dollars, requiring it to
pay 5 per cent. per annum, amounting to fifty thousand dollars per year,
which is to be devoted to the maintenance and development of the library
and its branches. During the last year 430,217 books were distributed;
37,196 people of Baltimore are registered upon the books as readers; and
it is safe to say that 37,000 frequenters of the Pratt Library are of
more value to Baltimore, to the State, and to the country than all the
inert, lazy, and hopelessly-poor in the whole nation. And it may further
be safely said that, by placing within the reach of 37,000 aspiring
people books which they were anxious to obtain, Mr. Pratt has done more
for the genuine progress of the people than has been done by all the
contributions of all the millionaires and rich people to help those who
cannot help themselves. The one wise administrator of his surplus has
poured his fertilizing stream upon soil that was ready to receive it and
return a hundred-fold. The many squanderers have not only poured their
streams into sieves which never can be filled,--they have done worse;
they have poured them into stagnant sewers that breed the diseases which
afflict the body politic. And this is not all. The million dollars of
which Mr. Pratt has made so grand a use are something, but there is
something greater still. When the fifth branch library was opened in
Baltimore, the speaker said:
"Whatever may have been done in these four years, it was his
pleasure to acknowledge that much, very much, was due to the
earnest interest, the wise councils, and the practical
suggestions of Mr. Pratt. He never seemed to feel that the
mere donation of great wealth for the benefit of his
fellow-citizens was all that would be asked of him, but he
wisely labored to make its application as comprehensive and
effective as possible. Thus he constantly lightened burdens
that were, at times, very heavy, brought good cheer and
bright sunshine when clouds flitted across the sky, and made
every officer and employee feel that good work was
appreciated, and loyal devotion to duty would receive hearty
commendation."
This is the finest picture I have ever seen of any of the millionaire
class. As here depicted, Mr. Pratt is the ideal disciple of the "Gospel
of Wealth." We need have no fear that the mass of toilers will fail to
recognize in such as he their best leaders and their most invaluable
allies; for the problem of poverty and wealth, of employer and employed,
will be practically solved whenever the time of the few is given, and
their wealth is administered during their lives, for the best good of
that portion of the community which has not been burdened by the
responsibilities which attend the possession of wealth. We shall have no
antagonism between classes when that day comes, for the high and the
low, the rich and the poor, shall then indeed be brothers.
No millionaire will go far wrong in his search for one of the best forms
for the use of his surplus who chooses to establish a free library in
any community that is willing to maintain and develop it. John Bright's
words should ring in his ear: "It is impossible for any man to bestow a
greater benefit upon a young man than to give him access to books in a
free library." Closely allied to the library, and, where possible,
attached to it, there should be rooms for an art gallery and museum, and
a hall for such lectures and instruction as are provided in the Cooper
Union. The traveller upon the Continent is surprised to find that every
town of importance has its art gallery and museum; these may be large or
small, but in any case each has a receptacle for the treasures of the
locality, which is constantly receiving valuable gifts and bequests. The
free library and art gallery of Birmingham are remarkable among these,
and every now and then a rich man adds to their value by presenting
books, fine pictures, or other works of art. All that our cities require
to begin with is a proper fireproof building. Their citizens who travel
will send to it rare and costly things from every quarter of the globe
they visit, while those who remain at home will give or bequeath to it
of their treasures. In this way these collections will grow until our
cities will ultimately be able to boast of permanent exhibitions from
which their own citizens will derive incalculable benefit, and which
they will be proud to show to visitors. In the Metropolitan Museum of
Art in this city we have made an excellent beginning. Here is another
avenue for the proper use of surplus wealth.
_Third_--We have another most important department in which great sums
can be worthily used,--the founding or extension of hospitals, medical
colleges, laboratories, and other institutions connected with the
alleviation of human suffering, and especially with the prevention
rather than the cure of human ills. There is no danger of pauperizing a
community in giving for such purposes, because such institutions relieve
temporary ailments or shelter only those who are hopeless invalids. What
better gift than a hospital can be given to a community that is without
one?--the gift being conditioned upon its proper maintenance by the
community in its corporate capacity. If hospital accommodation already
exists, no better method for using surplus wealth can be found than in
making additions to it. The late Mr. Vanderbilt's gift of half a million
of dollars to the medical department of Columbia College for a chemical
laboratory was one of the wisest possible uses of wealth. It strikes at
the prevention of disease by penetrating into its causes. Several others
have established such laboratories, but the need for them is still
great.
If there be a millionaire in the land who is at a loss what to do with
the surplus that has been committed to him as trustee, let him
investigate the good that is flowing from these chemical laboratories.
No medical college is complete without its laboratory. As with
universities, so with medical colleges; it is not new institutions that
are required, but additional means for the more thorough equipment of
those that exist. The forms that benefactions to these may wisely take
are numerous, but probably none is more useful than that adopted by Mr.
Osborne when he built a school for training female nurses at Bellevue
College. If from all gifts there flows one-half of the good that comes
from this wise use of a millionaire's surplus, the most exacting may
well be satisfied. Only those who have passed through a lingering and
dangerous illness can rate at their true value the care, skill, and
attendance of trained female nurses. Their employment as nurses has
enlarged the sphere and influence of woman. It is not to be wondered at
that a Senator of the United States and a physician distinguished in
this country for having received the highest distinctions abroad should
find their wives from this class.
_Fourth_--In the very front rank of benefactions public parks should be
placed, always provided that the community undertakes to maintain,
beautify, and preserve inviolate the parks given to it. No more useful
or more beautiful monument can be left by any man than a park for the
city in which he was born or in which he has long lived, nor can the
community pay a more graceful tribute to the citizen who presents it
than to give his name to the gift. If a park be already provided, there
is still room for many judicious gifts in connection with it. Mr.
Phipps, of Allegheny, has given conservatories to the park there, which
are visited by many every day of the week, and crowded by thousands of
working people every Sunday, for, with rare wisdom, he has stipulated as
a condition of the gift that the conservatories shall be open on
Sundays. The result of his experiment has been so gratifying that he is
justified in adding to them from his surplus, as he is doing largely
this year. To any lover of flowers among the wealthy I commend a study
of what is possible for them to do in the light of Mr. Phipps's example;
and may they please note that Mr. Phipps is a wise as well as a liberal
giver, for he requires the city to maintain these conservatories, and
thus secures for them forever the public ownership, the public interest,
and the public criticism of their management. Had he undertaken to
manage and maintain them, it is probable that popular interest in the
gift would never have been awakened.
The parks and pleasure-grounds of small towns throughout Europe are not
less surprising than their libraries, museums, and art galleries. We saw
nothing more pleasing during our recent travels than the hillside of
Bergen, in Norway. It has been converted into one of the most
picturesque of pleasure-grounds; fountains, cascades, water-falls,
delightful arbors, fine terraces, and statues adorn what was before a
barren mountain side. Here is a field worthy of study by the millionaire
who would confer a lasting benefit upon his fellows. Another beautiful
instance of the right use of wealth in the direction of making cities
more and more attractive we found in Dresden. The owner of the leading
paper there bequeathed its revenues forever to the city, to be used in
beautifying it. An art committee decides from time to time what new
artistic feature is to be introduced or what hideous feature is to be
changed, and as the revenues accrue they are expended in this direction.
Thus through the gift of this patriotic newspaper proprietor his native
city of Dresden is fast becoming one of the most artistic places of
residence in the whole world. A work having been completed, it devolves
upon the city to maintain it forever. May I be excused if I commend to
our millionaire newspaper proprietors the example of their colleague in
the capital of Saxony?
Scarcely a city of any magnitude in the older countries is without many
structures and features of great beauty. Much has been spent upon
ornament, decoration, and architectural effect: we are still far behind
in these things upon this side of the Atlantic. Our Republic is great in
some things,--in material development unrivalled; but let us always
remember that in art and in the finer touches we have scarcely yet taken
a place. Had the exquisite memorial arch recently erected temporarily in
New York been shown in Dresden, the art committee there would probably
have been enabled, from the revenue of the newspaper given by its owner
for just such purposes, to order its permanent erection to adorn the
city forever.
While the bestowal of a park upon a community as one of the best uses
for surplus wealth will be universally approved, in embracing such
additions to it as conservatories, or in advocating the building of
memorial arches and works of adornment, it is probable that many will
think we go too far, and consider these somewhat fanciful. The material
good to flow from them may not be so directly visible; but let not any
practical mind, intent only upon material good, depreciate the value of
wealth given for these or for kindred aesthetic purposes as being
useless as far as the mass of the people and their needs are concerned.
As with libraries and museums, so with these more distinctively artistic
works; these perform their great use when they reach the best of the
masses of the people. It is worth more to reach and touch the sentiment
for beauty in the naturally bright minds of this class than that those
incapable of being so touched should be pandered to. For what the
improver of the race must endeavor to do is to reach those who have the
divine spark ever so feebly developed, that it may be strengthened and
grow. For my part, I think Mr. Phipps put his money to better use in
giving the workingmen of Allegheny conservatories filled with beautiful
flowers, orchids, and aquatic plants, which they, with their wives and
children, can enjoy in their spare hours, and on which they can feed the
love for the beautiful, than if he had given his surplus money to
furnish them with bread, for those in health who cannot earn their bread
are scarcely worth considering by the individual giver; the care of such
being the duty of the state. The man who erects in a city a truly
artistic arch, statue, or fountain makes a wise use of his surplus. "Man
does not live by bread alone."
_Fifth_--We have another good use for surplus wealth, in providing for
our cities halls suitable for meetings of all kinds, especially for
concerts of elevating music. Our cities are rarely provided with halls
for these purposes, being in this respect also very far behind European
cities. The Springer Hall, of Cincinnati, that valuable addition to the
city, was largely the gift of Mr. Springer, who was not content to
bequeath funds from his estate at death, but who gave during his life,
and, in addition, gave--what was equally important--his time and
business ability to insure the successful results which have been
achieved. The gift of a hall to any city lacking one is an excellent use
for surplus wealth for the good of a community. The reason why the
people have only one instructive and elevating, or even amusing,
entertainment when a dozen would be highly beneficial, is that the rent
of a hall, even when a suitable hall exists (which is rare), is so great
as to prevent managers from running the risk of financial failure. If
every city in our land owned a hall which could be given or rented for a
small sum for such gatherings as a committee or the mayor of the city
judged advantageous, the people could be furnished with proper lectures,
amusements, and concerts at an exceedingly small cost. The town halls of
European cities, many of which have organs, are of inestimable value to
the people, when utilized as they are in the manner suggested. Let no
one underrate the influence of entertainments of an elevating or even of
an amusing character, for these do much to make the lives of the people
happier and their natures better. If any millionaire born in a small
village, which has now become a great city, is prompted in the day of
his success to do something for his birthplace with part of his surplus,
his grateful remembrance cannot take a form more useful than that of a
public hall with an organ, provided the city agrees to maintain and use
it.
_Sixth_--In another respect we are still much behind Europe. A form of
beneficence which is not uncommon there is providing swimming baths for
the people. The donors of these have been wise enough to require the
city benefited to maintain them at its own expense, and as proof of the
contention that everything should never be done for any one or for any
community, but that the recipients should invariably be called upon to
do part, it is significant that it is found essential for the popular
success of these healthful establishments to exact a nominal charge for
their use. In many cities, however, the school children are admitted
free at fixed hours upon certain days, different hours being fixed for
the boys and the girls to use the great swimming baths, hours or days
being also fixed for the use of these baths by ladies. In inland cities
the young of both sexes are thus taught to swim. Swimming clubs are
organized, and matches are frequent, at which medals and prizes are
given. The reports published by the various swimming baths throughout
Great Britain are filled with instances of lives saved because those who
fortunately escaped ship-wreck had been taught to swim in the baths, and
not a few instances are given in which the pupils of certain bathing
establishments have saved the lives of others. If any disciple of the
"Gospel of Wealth" gives his favorite city large swimming and private
baths (provided the municipality undertakes their management as a city
affair), he will never be called to account for an improper use of the
funds intrusted to him.
_Seventh_--Churches as fields for the use of surplus wealth have
purposely been reserved until the last, because, these being sectarian,
every man will be governed by his own attachments; therefore gifts to
churches, it may be said, are not, in one sense, gifts to the community
at large, but to special classes. Nevertheless, every millionaire may
know of a district where the little cheap, uncomfortable, and altogether
unworthy wooden structure stands at the cross-roads, to which the whole
neighborhood gathers on Sunday, and which is the centre of social life
and source of neighborly feeling. The administrator of wealth has made a
good use of part of his surplus if he replaces that building with a
permanent structure of brick, stone, or granite, up the sides of which
the honeysuckle and columbine may climb, and from whose tower the
sweet-tolling bell may sound. The millionaire should not figure how
cheaply this structure can be built, but how perfect it can be made. If
he has the money, it should be made a gem, for the educating influence
of a pure and noble specimen of architecture, built, as the pyramids
were built, to stand for ages, is not to be measured by dollars. Every
farmer's home, heart, and mind in the district will be influenced by the
beauty and grandeur of the church. But having given the building, the
donor should stop there; the support of the church should be upon its
own people; there is not much genuine religion in the congregation or
much good to flow from the church which is not supported at home.
Many other avenues for the wise expenditure of surplus wealth might be
indicated. I enumerate but a few--a very few--of the many fields which
are open, and only these in which great or considerable sums can be
judiciously used. It is not the privilege, however, of millionaires
alone to work for or aid measures which are certain to benefit the
community. Every one who has but a small surplus above his moderate
wants may share this privilege with his richer brothers, and those
without surplus can give at least part of their time, which is usually
as important as funds, and often more so. Some day, perhaps, with your
permission, I will endeavor to point out some fields and modes in which
these may perform well their part as trustees of wealth, or leisure,
according to the measure of their respective fortunes.
It is not expected, neither is it desirable, that there should be a
general concurrence as to the best possible use of surplus wealth. For
different men and different localities there are different uses. What
commends itself more highly to the judgment of the administrator is the
best use for him, for his heart should be in the work. It is as
important in administering wealth as it is in any other branch of a
man's work that he should be enthusiastically devoted to it and feel
that in the field selected his work lies.
Besides this, there is room and need for all kinds of wise benefactions
for the common weal. The man who builds a university, library, or
laboratory performs no more useful work than he who elects to devote
himself and his surplus means to the adornment of a park, the gathering
together of a collection of pictures for the public, or the building of
a memorial arch. These are all true laborers in the vineyard. The only
point required by the "Gospel of Wealth" is that the surplus which
accrues from time to time in the hands of man should be administered by
him in his own lifetime for that purpose which is seen by him, as
trustee, to be best for the good of the people. To leave at death what
he cannot take away, and place upon others the burden of the work which
it was his own duty to perform, is to do nothing worthy. This requires
no sacrifice, nor any sense of duty to his fellows.
Time was when the words concerning the rich man entering heaven were
regarded as a hard saying. Today, when all questions are probed to the
bottom and the standards of faith received the most liberal
interpretations, the startling verse has been relegated to the rear, to
await the next kindly revision as one of those things which cannot be
quite understood, but which meanwhile--it is carefully to be
observed--are not to be understood literally. But is it so very
improbable that the next stage of thought is not to restore the doctrine
in all its pristine purity and force, as being in perfect harmony with
sound ideas upon the subject of wealth and poverty, the rich and the
poor, and the contrasts everywhere seen and deplored? In Christ's day,
it is evident, reformers were against the wealthy. It is none the less
evident that we are fast recurring to that position to-day; and there
will be nothing to surprise the student of sociological development if
society should soon approve the text which has caused so much anxiety:
"It is easier for a camel to enter the eye of a needle than for a rich
man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven." Even if the needle were the small
casement at the gates, the words betoken serious difficulty for the
rich. It will be but a step for the theologian to take from the doctrine
that he who dies rich dies disgraced to that which brings upon the man
punishment or deprivation hereafter.
The "Gospel of Wealth" but echoes Christ's words. It calls upon the
millionaire to sell all that he hath and give it in the highest and best
form to the poor, by administering his estate himself for the good of
his fellows, before he is called upon to lie down and rest upon the
bosom of Mother Earth. So doing, he will approach his end no longer the
ignoble hoarder of useless millions, poor, very poor indeed, in money,
but rich, very rich, twenty times a millionaire still, in the affection,
gratitude and admiration of his fellow-men, and--sweeter far--soothed
and sustained by the still small voice within, which, whispering, tells
him that, because he has lived, perhaps one small part of the great
world has been bettered just a little. This much is sure: against such
riches as these no bar will be found at the gates of Paradise.