that should exist in all establishments in which working people are employed. They realize, in short, the true American principle-that the welfare of one is the welfare of all; that the interests of the employer and employed in the long run are identical, and that the best results for the whole commonwealth are to be obtained by extending equal and impartial justice to every individual.

About the time of the Civil War the attention of Christian and benevolent people was awakened to the crowding of families in the cities of that day. None of these would now be called great, but there was congestion much worse than there is now. Committees of citizens were appointed in New York and other cities to investigate the subject. The interest of the public was aroused; individuals showed what could be done in the way of improving tenements, and there has been a gradual development of these, increasing in convenience with every new construction. Alfred White, in Brooklyn, was one of the first in this country. His example was followed by others. Great companies have later been formed for the same purpose. It is not too much to say that there were no buildings in America seventy-five years ago that had the comfort and conveniences of the improved tenements that are now in use in the city of New York. In Philadelphia and in Baltimore the tendency has been to put up small houses covering a larger area. Different cities have different conditions, and naturally deal with the subject in different ways. But I call your attention to the fact that in every part of the United States improvement in the houses of the plain people is progressive. Except in a few isolated districts no decent American family now lives in such a house as that in which Abraham Lincoln was born.

You ask me why I have begun this address with this brief sketch of the evolution of social conditions in this country. I answer, it is because our system was in the judgment of the founders an experiment. We have tried it for one hundred and twenty-four years. Is it a success? If so,

let us go on with it courageously. If not, give it up. Many people declare that it is a failure. They have become aware that there are still evils to be removed, and sins to be struggled against. They impatiently denounce existing conditions and boldly declare that there is no remedy for them except by social revolution. I read the other day, for example, in a circular sent to me for a subscription: "Decent, normal living is impossible under the present housing conditions in New York." I dare to assert that this is untrue. I know from personal experience and observation that the people of New York City are much better clothed and fed and housed than they were sixty years ago; the streets are cleaner, better lighted; the water supply is more ample, the means of transportation from one part of the city to another are more adequate; parks and playgrounds have greatly multiplied; the whole condition of city life is more healthful than it was sixty years ago. The schools are better, are more numerous even in proportion to the great advance in population, and are better equipped and better taught. The churches and synagogues are more active and reach larger portions of the community. Activity in philanthrophic work is far greater and more general. In short, I assert, as a result of my own experience, that we have made enormous progress during this period, so that the majority of New Yorkers can and do live decent, normal, useful and happy lives.

Again, I see it asserted in a periodical published by the members of one of our philanthropic societies that the majority of wage earners or laborers in the United States are not being paid a decent living wage. That, I assert, to be untrue. I know these people well-not only from what I read about them in books, but from what I have seen of them in their own houses in the city and in the countryand I declare as truth, indisputable by any who will take the pains to study and investigate at first hand, with candid eye, and not with a feverish and pessimistic glance, that the majority of the wage earners and laborers in the United

States are paid a decent living wage and do live decently. Again I see it stated in the same periodical "that justice does not exist alike for the rich and the poor is a common day experience." I have practiced law for fifty years in the Federal courts in many Circuits, and in the State courts of New York and New Jersey; it has been part of my professional duty to study the reports of other States, and I can declare that this is untrue. You, my brethren, will join with me in the assurance. I do not mean to say that the courts are infallible. But I do say that in the controversy between a poor man and a rich the scales more often incline in favor of the poor. The temper of both Judge and Jury is to make every allowance on that side of the case, rather than to discriminate in favor of the rich.

Far be it from me to assert that there are no faults in our social system. I know there are many and for years have done my part with diligence and earnestness to correct them. What I do object to is the indiscriminate attack upon existing conditions. What our fathers strove to accomplish, and what they did accomplish, was to send down upon the dry and parched field a refreshing shower that would quicken every drooping plant. What the revolutionists are striving to accomplish is a flood, like that which we have just deplored in Ohio, which sweeps away the results of toil and experience and makes a desert where once there was fertility.

Again, I do not mean to say that everybody is as comfortable as everybody else. That would be ridiculous. What I do assert is the fundamental principle of American democracy, that the man or the woman who is thrifty, industrious and honest shall have an opportunity to better his condition and by saving something from the result of his toil climb to a higher level. The revolutionists forget that all wealth is the result of co-operation and that whatever tends to produce enmity between the creative mind that plans the work and the industrious hand that does it cripples both the head and the hand. The American conception

of democracy is to give to each citizen an opportunity to make the most of his natural gifts, to restrain him from unlawful interference with the rights of his neighbor, and to teach him to rely for success on the blessings of God, and on his own honest industry and dauntless courage. This is the law of God, and our fathers embodied it in our Constitution. Emerson only paraphrases the words of Scripture when he describes the Lord saying to the people of America:

"I cause from every creature

His proper good to flow;

As much as he is and doeth,

So much he shall bestow."

"The world was made for honest trade,

To plant and eat be none afraid."

"For he that worketh high and wise,

Nor pauses in his plan

Shall take the sun out of the skies
Ere freedom out of man."

American Freedom is the child of American Democracy. It involves equal rights and equal duties. It involves on the one hand the supremacy of law, on the other it means freedom from needless governmental restraint. The distinctive American idea which we ought to cherish sacredly and from which we should never depart is that the greatest good of the greatest number can be best achieved by giving to each individual the right to work out his own salvation. Long before 1789 other nations had tried forms of government in which the will of the public officials was supreme and in which the individual had no protection from arbitrary power. By the law of the Roman Empire the will of the Prince was paramount. He had the right by special decree to interpret statutes in reference to cases pending in the courts.

Sic volo, sic jubco, stet pro ratione voluntas.

The result was tyranny, not freedom.

The Legislative Assembly in France in the days of the Directory had unlimited powers. They were constantly depriving citizens of life, liberty and property without due

E

process of law. The result was justly called the Reign of Terror, and it resulted in national ruin and disgrace. At last Napoleon got into the saddle and at least gave the people security and order. All experience shows that the honest, hardworking people who are the real life and strength of a nation' will not long submit to be plundered or oppressed by public officers, even though these were selected by a temporary majority of voters. The real majority will have security and order at any cost. The American method embodied in the American Constitution maintains security and preserves order, and protects the life, liberty and property of the individual from unlawful restraint or interference. It is a distinct evolution in civilization. To it in large measure we owe that security and good government which have stimulated our youth to diligent endeavor, and made us on the whole a happy and prosperous people. The American system is a success; a glorious, unprecedented success.

Let me then adjure you, as members of an honorable and ancient profession, not to bow down before the idol of the omnipotence of government, whether by individuals or by temporary majorities. "Do not become entangled again in a yoke of bondage," or believe for a moment that your salvation is to be found in numerous and complicated governmental requirements. That is an European idea which our fathers discarded. On the fragments of that shattered idol they reared the American Republic. I adjure you, as you value the welfare of your children, and your country, to stand up bravely for the true American principle of the dignity of labor, of the love of labor, of the security of labor and of the freedom of labor. This is our famous quadrilateral. If the men and women of America are true to these principles and exert their mighty influence in their protection and defense, the assaults of our domestic enemies will be as impotent as the clouds that pass across the sky to impair the heat and light of the sun. These may be obscured for a time, but they cannot be quenched.