[Letter] Sept.1,1887,Clifton Springs [to F.H. Giddings]

Sept. 1, 1887, Crifton Springs.

Dear Mr. Giddings,
           I found your letter
awaiting me on my return from
Watkins and Glen. I wish I could be
of assistance to you in deciding
the important question. My off
hand impressions are liable to be
based on insufficient data. Such
as they are you are more than
welcome to them. As in my own
case there are two questions, besides
the one of successful scientific
work, that need to be considered.
We have both of us to consider our
health, and the comfort of our
families. We need light work, and
fair pay. With these we can hope to
do something towards the advancement
of science. As I understand the
situation there are four alternatives
of which two, viz. statistical work
and journalism, would keep you
on the border region of economic
study, but both would load you
with routine work not especially
conducive to success in a scientific
line. Journalism would be the more
stimulating, but the more wearying
work. In the long run it might be
hazardous to attempt to combine it
with much else. Statistical work
would leave you more energy to spare,
and would afford correspondingly less
of mental stimulus (perhaps). As between
engineering and editing Mr. Bryant's
other publications, the presumption is
greatly in favor of the editing. There
is less uncertainty about it. I have a
cousin who has made himself a
thorough R. R. engineer, but who has
found it very difficult to get more
than starvation wages. He is at best
doing a little better. From my point
of view I should say the engineering
might be excluded from the list to
be considered. As between the two
first considered, and the last
I should suppose that the editing of
the Paper World etc. would give you
rather less direct connection with
economic work and workers, but would
tax you less and (perhaps) pay
you better. It might leave a
margin of time and strength for
writing economic articles etc. I
think this last is your best field,
and wish you might have a full
scope in it. You can make
scientific discoveries, and put them
before the public in an effective
way. I confess I am personally
biased in favor of the plan that will
keep you in Springfield and within
visiting distance each way. If any
other plan promised more for you I
certainly should not allow my wishes to
blind my judgment if I could help it.
If you now had a markedly better
alternative open to you I should say
take it. Off hand I should say the
present office might offer more than
either of the others. I may be wrong.
Am I so? Poor Work and Wages! "The good
die first." It might have lived if it had
ranted about the wrongs of labor, or stiffly
adhered to the course of the hide-bound
capitalistic organs. If I were a millionaire
philanthropist I would not let it die.
 About our article - you
must not overwork on it. If it can
not be ready by Oct. 15 without making
one or both of us too weary it must
wait for the March No. I have written
quite an amount on mine, but cannot judge
of the quality of what I have. By the way if you
can easily find my 'Profits' article would you
mind sending a copy? Do not waste time in
searching, as I have copies at home. I expect to
return by 14th, and shall write, for the
present, on the article.

                       Yours Very Truly,
                             J. B. Clark