Newspaper Page Text
Neatness in the Highway,
The country highway is the connect
ing, link of the American farmers. It
binds the farms together instead of
separating then', and furnishes the
means by which a neighborhood may
be a unit in the nation. The “com
mon road” is a common interest, and
is the common expression of a com
mon life. Along it tht stranger passes
and from it he gains lasting and very
accurate impressions of those who
make it what it is.
If a highway was for travel and
nothing more, and travel was simply
the getting from one place to another,
then a good roadbed i f the shortest
length between connected points
would meet the full demands of a
country road. But people travel
largely for pleasure and when the
going is a duty, they desire to mix
as rnuen comfort with the commisstou
as is possible. I’he roadside is the
constantly changing panorama of all
• who pass along any highway.
The writer knows of two equally
good roads, so far as the roacbed is
concerned, at equal distances from a
village. One is kept clean, not ex
pensively so, the grass is cut, and it
well pays the owners of the land for
their work. The other common road
has half-finished ditches along the
side, which bristle with Canada this
tle and other vile weeds. The fences
are hedgerows of tilth and propagation
beds for noxi >us plants that each year
seed down the whole neighborhood
with expensive pests. The farmers
along this portion of the highway, have
with one accord, turned the road into
a common “slop jar,” into which they
throw everything that is not fit to be
seen. In one place is a large brush
heap, upon which the trimmings of
the trees in the dooryard are annually
thrown, and become an object of
fright to many a horse that passes by
starlight. A little further on is the
logyard of a farmer. The roadside is
appropriated as a place where the
necessary rails are si>lit from year to
year. In this brush the turkeys build
a nest, and behind the logs a litter of
pigs first sees the light of day. Born
upon the highway, these animals hold
all the claims of their birthright. The
next farmer has his barn “on the
road,” and with the tumble down
piles of old lumber, interspersed with
broken harrows and cultivators which
surround it, the passer-by must either
shut his eyes, and nose, too, or be a
witness to a thriftless, and even a dis
gusting scene. Not far up the road
things are even worse, for, instead of
the barn, the house is on the public
highway, and the carriage track is
daily sprinkled with the chips that
fly from the slow and melancholy
chopper in his boundless roadside
woody ard.
Tne farmers along the well-kept
roadway have no better farms than
their slip-shod neighbors on the other
side c f the village ; they perhaps do
not make any more money. But there
are some things in which they are
vastly superior. They live on a higher
plane, and therefore a comparison is
difficult to make, and not at all neces
sary. The well-k«-pt road gets all the
pleasure driving; no one thinks of
going into the ul kempt district except
on business. The tidy road is a
double and mutual comfort to those
who desire to take a pleasure drive aud
the farmers who dwell along the
highway. Nothing enlivens the com
mon life of the farmer and his family
like the sight of frequent vehicles upon
the highway.
The difference in the cost ot keep
ing the two extremes of country road
is in favor of the one that is neat and
pleasing to the eye. There is an in
crease of hay and a great saving of
labor in weed killing. The roadside
that is left to itself is not mowed and
yields only weeds.
The value of the farms, though the
same at the outset, are widely differ
ent now. Though the fertility of the
acres may be not far from the same,
the well-kept land is always salable at
a good price, while the shiftless farmer
must seek a buyer for his laud.
The rows of maple and elm trees
that were planted along the good road
fifteen years ago cost but a trifle at
the time, but are now so valuable that
to cut them down would be counted a
sin. They pay a good interest in the
shade and beauty which they afford,
while at the same time the work of
wood-makiug is going on.”
The Princess Louise has retu#ued to
Victoria, aud the Maiquls ol Lome
has gone further into the interior of
British Columbia.
Foman Cruelty.
A National Cons:oration of Inhumanity.
That at an advanced period of mater
ial civilization spectacles thereof the
one grand interest consisted in the
elaborate and wholesale torture and
carnage of men and animals should I
not only have been tolerated with
scarcely a protest for centuries, but
should have formed the chief and in
dispensable amusement of both sexes
and all classes of the population, in
eluding the highest—this appears on
first sight to modern thinkers a moral
fact almost incredible in its atrocity.
And so firm, moreover, was their hold
on popular sympathy that they lasted
long after the conversion of the empire
to Christianity. Constantiue, to be
sure, issued an edict suppressing the
gladiatorial shows, hut it was suffered
to remain a dead letter, and it was not
till nearly a century later, when the
Asiatic monk Telemachus leaped into
the arena and separated the combat
ants at the cost of his own life—he
was fetoned to death by ibe indignant
spectators — that these games were
finally abolished. Something may be
due to the religious origin of the cus
tom, which is commonly alleged to
have sprung out ol a rite ot human
sacrifice offered at the tombs of great
men; though some scholars, like
Mommsen, deny the existence of
human sacrifice at Rome. - Later on
motives of \ olicy OQnspired to sustain
the practice, both as a means ot keep
ing up the military spirit of the people
and as offering the sole opportunity
under a despot Emperor for the thou
sands of citizens then assembled in
presence of their sovereign and his
Minister to present petitions and make
known th>ir grievances.
Still these explanations do not cairy
us very far. Theatrical entertain
ments, such as the Greeks delighted
in, would have answered the latter
purpose quite as well, but for appre
ciating such refined amusements these
ghastly orgies of blood quite unfitted
the Roman populace. And it is a
curious fact., noted by a distinguished
modern writer, that, as different kinds
of vice, which might appear to have
no mutual connection, do yet act and
reacton one another, so here the in
tense craving after excitement engen
dered and gratified by gladiatorial
combats served to stimulate the taste
for such orgies of sensuality as de
scribed by historians like Tacitus and
Soetouius. And hencs was not only
Hercules buri t ou 'he stage, not in
tfligy but iu the person of a condemned
criminal, but the deeds of gods and
heroes were represented, as Juvenal
says, to the life. Nor can it be ques
tioned—and it is chiefly in or lei to
illustrate that terrible lesson that we
have referred to the subject here—that
the gladiator shows betrayed not mere
ly ind fferenee to human suffering, but
that capacity for real and keen plea ure
in the contemplation of suffering, as
such, which many are loath, for the
credit of human na ure, to admit.
Suetonius, for instance, tells us that it
was the sptcial delight of Cli udius to
watch ibe faces of the expiring glad
iators, as be had come to take a kind
of artistic pleasure in observing the
variation in their agony. Heliogabalus
aud Galerius used to regale themselves
while at the table with the spectacle
of animals devoured by wild beasts ;
and Lactantius says of Galerius “he
never supped without human blood.”
And what is more horrible still “beau
tiful eyes, trembling with passion,
looked dowmupon the light ; and the
noblest ladies in Rome, even the Em
press herself, had been known to crave
the victor’s love.” A story told by Bt
Augustine exhibits the ghastly fascina
tion of the spectacle. A Christian
friend of his \iad somehow been drawn
into the amphitheatre, which Chris
tians were strlcly forbidden to enter,
and rt solved to gui rd against tliB temp
tation to sinful ei j< yment by keeping
his eyes closed ; a sudden cry led him
to look up, aud he was unable to with
draw his gaze again.
If it shocks us to find among a high
ly civilized people tills national conse
cration of cruelty, it is perhaps more
startling that with a few exceptions
the novelists and i hllosophers of the
day had not a word to say against it.
The refined and gentle hearted Cicero
calmly observes that some men think
these spectacles cruel and inhuman,
but to make this use of criminals is
really lo present to the eye au excellent
discipline against suffering and death.
Juvenal’s aristocratic feelings were
outraged at the Roman nobility con
descending to act as gladiators; but
there is nothing to show that the spec
tacle in itself < fftmled him. Seneca
ai d Plutarch, as we pointed out before,
adopt a very d ffbreut tone, and Mar
cus Aurelius ordered the gladiators to
fight with blunted swords, as he also
ordered that no rope-dancers should
perform without a" net or a mattress
being spread beneath them. But such
rare aud houorab e exceptions onl.v
help to prove the rule. During the
reign of te nor in Fn nee a spirit very
like that of the worst period of the
Roman empire was evoked, and it has
been observed that in both cases the
grossest inhumanity was sometimes
found united with affection for ani
mals—that is, for pet animals. Four
nier w .s devoted to a squirrel, Couthon
to his spaniel, and Marat kept doves.
But it way well be questioned whether
these particular affections indicate any
general temper ot mercy toward man
kind. Even* the most blood thirsty
moi ster may have a sincere partiality
for 1 is own belongings, paramour, or
friend, or child. It is not clear that
the Marshal de Re'z, the historical
original of Bluebeard, whose name'ess
atrocities might have caused Nero to
i lush, was wholly devoid of such feel*
iugs
Statistical.
The Potato Crop.
The potato crop is said to be almost
as much of a failure this year in west
ern New York as it was last. New
York produced last jear 25.000,0d0
bushels and the rest of the country
80.000. 000—in all 115,000,1 00, or fully
20.000. 000 lees than the average for the
past ten years. If, as is reported, the
New York crop is only 22.000,000, or
less than last year, the high price of
potaloes is likely to last for another
twelvemonth, to the very serious loss
of the community. In the last fiscal
year over $4,500,000 < f potatoes were
imported, against $874,019 in 1881,
5274.220 in 1880 and $1,345.919 in 1879,
another bad potato year. In spite of
cheap breadstuffs, a po( r potato crop
is likely to continue this large imi ort
ol an article of food.
Canal Enterprise.
The Kraw Canal.is the third great
international water- way in which
French capital is interesting itself,
the other two—one completed and one
begun—being the Suez and Panama
canals. The Isthmus of Kraw, which
the canal is intended to cut, is the
narrow neck of laud to which the
Malaysian Peninsula shrinks midway
between Rangoon and Singapore.
Two riv< rs, both navigable, leave only
six or eight miles of sand and soft
veins of sandstone to be cut in order to
furnish a -water-way from the Bay of
Bengal to the Gulf of Siam. Such a
canal can be easily dug at a cost of not
over $20,000,000, and it would open a
way for at least 1,500,000 tons to and
from China. It would changf the
current of the trade which now goes
thiough the Straits of Malacca and
shorten by a week the v >yage to
China. A French company is organ
ized to build it, but England is sure
finally to control it.
Ocean Freight*.
The engagements of room in: de for
grain during the wtek have been
light, and amount to only 26,000
bushels of win at taken at 3d. forth#
Le^land line. The asking rate for
grain to Liver po >1 is 3d., and for Lon
don shippers are offering 4d. There
is, however, next to no call for room
or for vessels to take grain Iu New
York business has also declined, and
only a'few charters and engagements
have been made during the past few
days. To Liverpool the grain rate is
about 4|d.; Loudon, 5£d.; Glasgow, 3£
u8$d ; Hull, 6d ; Antwerp, 7d. A
steamer has been taken from New
York to Cork for orders, 11,060 qrs. at
5s. l&d* ex-Dunkirk. The movement
in provisions here has been light,
and to Liverpool tne rate has been
15s., and to London 22s. 6d. The
tobacco engagements iiave been light,
and to Liverpool the rate is 20s., aud
to London 25s. There has been very
little doing in cotton, although a few
inquiries have been made for Septem
ber room. In sack flour there has
been a moderate demand, and the rate
to Liverpool is 12s. 6.1., hut to London
It is 18s. 9d., wilh not much demand.
The exports of wheat from New York
last week have been a little larger
than for the previous week, amounting
to 1,825,488 bushels, against 1,764.773
the previous week, aud 1,169,054 for
the corresponding week last year.
The decrease iu the exports of corn is
most marked. For the month of July
the total txportH of corn from ^lie
i ouutry were 343,898 bushels, aud’for
i he same mouth last year the exports
were 10,784,921 bushels. For the seven
months of this year the total o^ i>rts
have been 10.523,791 bushels, against
f 0,299,820 same time last yeur.
Who Owns Monty.
This appears to be such a simple
question that even a little child might
be expected to answer it correctly.
Nine out of ten people will reply :
“ Money of course belongs to the per
son who earns it,” and the nine people
in ten who make this reply will be iu
the wrong.
Rightfully, money cannot be earned.
But if I agree to do a certain piece of
work for live dollars, and am paid five
dollars, have I not earned five dollars?
No. Then what have I earned ? You
haved earned the right to use five dol
lars.
No one, do what he may, can make
money ; if he attempts to do so, the
result will be fine aud imprisonment.
He may make a watch, a spade, a
house, and rn ny other things, all of
which, because made by private or in
dividual enterprise, can become the
property of the makers or.of those to
whom the makers give and sell them.
Blit money no one dares to make, un
less he is willing to incur the conse
quent pe'nalties. Tne nation alone
through its government can create
money; then fore, money is national
property ; and while national property,
cannot also be private property; and
money remains national propel ty so
long as it is money.
The nation alone has power to create
money, and what is created belongs
exclusively to the creator of it. The
nation alone has power to withdraw 7
all or part of tne money; could the
nation do this if money were private
property ? The nation alone has the
power to repair the mutilated or to
restore the destroyed tokens which
represent money ; could the nation do
this if money were private property ?
Ouly the nation can prosecute those
who mutilate or eounterleit the tokens
which npresent rnorey; could the
nation do this if money were private
property ? In short, from the date of
the appearance of the currency until its
final withdrawal, the nation exercises
over it a 1 those rights and privileges
wuich belong only to its exclusive
ownership.
Money i-s as much national property
as a national highway or national
bridge. Everyone who has earned the
right to use the highway or bridge,
may do so freely to the full extent of
his power, for business or for pleasure,
and no one may legally interfere with
his doing so, or dispossess him of the
part of the highway or bridge he may
be actually upon ; but this liberty to
freely use the highway or bridge, gives
him no right of private ownership to
either of them, in whole or in part.
Likewise, every one who has earned
the right to use the national property
called money, may do so freely to the
full extent of his ability, either for
business or for pleasure, aud no one
may legally interfere with him or rob
him of the money he holds. But this
liberty to thus freely use money, aud
this protection accorded to him in that
use, give him over the monfey no right
of private ownership.
Now, money being national and not
private property, it follows, that no
person or association can justly levy a
toll or tax upon others for the use of
money..
Buppose a traveler who has earned
the right to use a national highway,
should insist that the part upon which
he stands belongs to him exclusively,
and make that an excuse for charging
other travelers toll for the privilege of
using the few or more feet of highway
he thus controls. Is it likely such
impudence and dishonesty would re
ceive the least toleration ? Neverthe
less, as regards that national property
called money, this impudence and dis
honesty are daily and hourly tolerated
under the sanction of law by hun
dreds of thousand of people. Every
one who has earned the right to use
money ^ssutues that the money he
happi ns to hold is his private prop
erty; and acting upon this assuinp
tion,straight way charges his neighbors
alL he can for the privilege of using it.
I have said that this pernicious
practice is sanctioned by' law; the
Government, the Nation sanctions it
by fixing the maximum toll or inter
est which individuals‘and corporations
shall charge for the privilege of using
the money they hold. But how could
Government fix the rate of tax or
toll to be charged for the use of money,
if money were private property ? Does
not this fact without further evidence
prove that mom y is publio, is national
property ? Why does not government
fix the rent to be charged for houses
and lands, or the hire of horses, car
riages, etc.? Bimply because these are
private aud not publio property. Gov
ernment establishes the maximum
rate of interest for monoy because
money is national property; and, be
cause it belongs to the nation, only the
nati< n has a right to say what snail be
charged for its use.
j .But since the uaticu as the exclusive
owner of money, has a right to fix
the rate of interest which shall be
charged for the use of its property,
why maxe a fuss when it does do so,
and allows individuals to pocket that
tax or interest ? Have not I, as tjm
owner of a house, the right to reL
another appropriate to his own use®
the rent paid for the use of my house?
Assuredly I have ; but it must be re
membered that when discussing a
question like this, we arc governed by
the rule of practice and not by the ex
ceptions to that jule. It is the rule
for the owner of a house to himself
enjoy the rent ort revenue derived
from it; and applying this rule to
uational property, we conclude, and
very justly, that the revenue derived
from that property should be divoted
to ibe use of the nation.
Suppose the nation, because it has
the right, were to allow travelers on
a national highway to charge their
fellows toil for the use of particular
parts these travelers took a fancy to
hold, and thereby pocketed a consid-'
erable revenue without much labor or
risk to themselves; would it be long
ere that highway was appropriated
through! ut its whole extent by these
toll-gatherers? Then fancy the re
sult : The whole population forced to
pay in the aggregate, an enormous
tax or toll to a comparatively few for
the use of what should be fiee and
open to all without charge; and these
comparatively few growing enormous
ly rich at the «xpense of their neigh
bors, with what should belong to the
owner, to the nation, as the rightful
recipient of the revenue derived from
its property.
This is a fancy sketch as regards the
national highway, but is a true sketch
as regards the national currency.
Gi vernment allows Individuals to
levy a tax or toll upon others for the
use of a national property called
money, which should be open and
free to all without charge; and per
mits those who gather this toll gr in
terest, to appropriate it to their own
U3e instead of giving it to the nation,
the real owner, to be used for the
benefit of all without distinction.
As an illustration of what this per
nicious practice can accomplish, I will
instance the national banks. These
institutions have sli ce their appear
ance levied a tax upon the people for
the use of money to the txient of
fifteen hundred millions of dollars.
This tax after deducting the cost of
collection, &o., has been Appropriated
byi say, two hundred and fifty thou
sand stockholders, at the expense of a
nation of fifty millions, to whom, as
the owners of the money,this enormous
revenue belongi d. Had the revenues
derived by individuals apfl corpora
tions from the tax or interrot for the
use of that national property called
money, been appropriated to the bene
fit of i's owner—the nation—the panic
of : 73 would not have occurred.
Borne workingmen who read this
may, perhaps, remark : “ No doubt
this is all true, but what ooncern is it
of ours? we pay no tax or interest for
the use of money, bee vase no one
will lend us any ; and we receive no
such tax, because we have no money
to lend.”
A little or* flection, however, will
satisfy the most skeptical that this
question concerns workingmen more
th* n any other class in the communi
ty. Who really finally pa’d the fifteen
hundred millions of tax levied by the
national banks for the use of money?
And who ultimately pay all the taxes
levied for the use of money?—The
workingmen and women. They paid
and do pay it in their wages, their
clothing, their food, their drink, their
rent, their pleasures, yea, they pay it
in the cost of being laid away in their
last resting place ; for usury respects
neither the cradle nor the grave.
Bulwer: —“ Wnen the Turk does
anything, consider what is the reason
able, straightforward interpretation to
place on that act. Then eliminate
absolutely that conclusion. Any
other may be possible; but that cer
tainly will not be.”
Recent experiments show that the
tensile strtugth of glass is between
2000 and 9000 pounds per square inoh,
and the crushing strength between
000 and 10,000 per square inoh. Mr.
Traullonie finds that flooring glass one
inoh square aud one loot between the
end supports breaks under a load of
170 pounds