Any object of wealth may cease to be counted, not because it has changed, but because wants have changed. The last year's bonnet goes for a song, because the fashion changes; the reaper rots behind the barn or at the roadside, because the harvester is wanted in its place. So the wealth in any object is limited by its relation to the present or prospective wants of its owner, and his control to meet these wants. The wealth of any community is its store of material objects suited to the current wants or fitted to exchange with other communities for more suitable articles of use. We estimate it only by thinking of uses in producing pleasure or preventing pain, its limitations in quantity to a certain range of wants, and its control for use or transfer by an owner.
Wealth distinguished from power.—Wealth is not to [pg 007] be confused with power of other kinds. Power may be for future exertion; wealth is the result of exertion. Power may take any form of welfare,—health, wisdom, character, as well as wealth. So no personal abilities can be counted as wealth, however useful they may be as means of gaining it. Jenny Lind's abilities as a singer may have been better than wealth; but exertion of those abilities in the United States enabled her to carry back to Europe wealth of which she had none before coming. The ingenuity of Elias Howe exerted upon the sewing machine has been an immense source of wealth and welfare to the world, but it alone could not secure him daily food. Your words and my music combined in a song fit to tickle the fancy of the multitude may transfer wealth to our pockets, but it was in neither the words nor the music, nor yet in the song, and still less in the power to contrive them. If wealth in material things had not been in possession of the multitude, the same sweet sounds might have given satisfaction to the crowds without an idea of wealth in the transaction. Much of the welfare of the world is from exertion of powers entirely independent of wealth. The chief joys of home are not measured by the wealth in our tenement. The chief welfare of society is only incidentally connected with wealth.
Chart No. I
Fluctuation of Farms and Farm Interests since 1850
At the top is shown the relative size of farms at the close of each census period, with the number of acres tilled and untilled. The lower part of the chart shows the changes in different farm interests, especially in the amount and character of capital employed and the number of people engaged in agriculture. Assuming the conditions of 1850 to be par, the increase or decrease is shown for each kind of live stock, the number of farms, the total farm population, and the number of farm managers, as well as the valuation of real estate and of live stock. To illustrate, take No. 4, the number of cattle, excluding the cows. In 1860 there were 1.5 times as many as in 1850. In 1870, on account of the consumption and disturbance of the war, the number was reduced to 1.4 times as many. In 1880 there were more than 2.3 times as many, and in 1890 there were 3.48 times as many. In a few instances the estimate for 1897, though not an accurate enumeration, is added for comparison. A careful study of these various changes will show that while the total population in 1890 was only 2.7 times the population of 1850, the total number of people employed in farm occupations of every kind was 2.88 times as great; although the number of independent farmers was only 2.28 times as great. The total value of real estate in farms was over four times as great, and the total value of live stock exactly corresponded. The number of cows, sheep and hogs had not kept up with the population; while the number of beef cattle and horses and mules had increased much more rapidly. The fact that the value of live stock had increased in much greater proportion than the numbers shows that there has been great improvement in the individual character of the animals. That the average wealth of farm proprietors is more than three-fourths as large again is shown by comparison of the number of farmers with the value of the farms. That the number of mules, cattle and hogs actually decreased between 1860 and 1870 indicates the enormous consumption of the armies in the Civil War.
Chart I. Showing the rate of increase in farms and farm live stock as compared with population. See explanation, p. 8.
Chart No. II
Progress of the United States in Farm Crops since 1850