98 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
it was unscientific. The experience of intelligent observers is con- trary to Colonel Wright's conclusions. Observation is the more likely to be right because, like Sandy's figures, Colonel Wright's are necessarily wrong. True, he has not counted in "the year of our Lord," but in making his comparison he has failed to include at least one-half the property of the earlier period, and con- founding value with wealth, counts as social wealth much that represents but an increase of monopoly values.
Unfortunately our census fails to segregate land values and improvements, or to show the actual cost of the construction of railroads or gas works and other properties, the value of which represents to a large extent the value of the franchise or special privilege. For instance, the capital of Chicago gas companies is given at $40,857,246, which is well understood in Chicago to be nearly if not quite three times the cost of the plant. The difference between social wealth and property values is shown by Professor Hadley in a contribution to the Yale Review. Pro- fessor Hadley says :
The word wealth has two quite distinct meanings. In its broad or social sense it includes all of those objects whose possession contributes to the enjoy- ment or well being of society It is impossible to obtain any accurate
measure of wealth in this broad sense or even to say exactly what articles should be included in the estimate of such wealth ....
Individual wealth is more accurately designated as property. We may illustrate the distinction between social wealth and individual property by say- ing that wealth is produced, while property is acquired One or
two illustrations will serve to make the distinction clear. Under the English system of enclosures, land which had formerly been free to all the public to use was made the subject of private ownership. By this practice we had an increase of property. The landlords now had valuable rights which could be bought or sold rights of a kind that did not exist before but the wealth of the community, for the moment, was not one whit increased. There were no more means of enjoyment in existence than there had been before. There was acquisition of property without production of wealth. On the other hand,, in the abolition of slavery we sometimes see a nullification of property without a destruction of wealth.
In comparing the census valuation of 1860 with later valua- tions it is usual to omit slave values because it is recognized that
