In view of these contrasting facts, can any one say that the 33-millions of the property-losers were idle? or that the phenomenal increase of the wealth was produced [SN: HUMAN ENERGY IS THE INITIAL OPERATOR IN PRODUCTION.] by the very few owners of it because they had the most effective capital at their own hands? No, sir, the capital itself is dead in every respect and form, and not a single piece of it can produce anything by itself. But, being effective aid, assistant in production, capital only helps _the living human energy_ to increase the results of its labor. And it follows that whatever the increase in production due to mechanical forces or to other capital may be, it must be attributed to the activity of human energy which manipulates all invented forms of capital. And surely _the blessings of the various inventions_ consist in the fact that the inventions _can aid the labor energy to produce more wealth than it can produce without them_. Hence the real blessings of the invented capital ought to have been preëminently in the fact of its increasing the well-being of the millions of laborers in the various grades of industry. How is it, then, that the wealth of the United States nation, from 1865 to 1890, increased by more than 42-billion dollars worth, [SN: IS IT LOGICALLY CORRECT OR MORALLY RIGHT?] while the well-being of its producers greatly decreased? How is it that the tens of millions of the workers not only could not obtain the due share of the wealth they increased, but many millions of them in addition lost their own properties? How is it that the great blessings of the inventors have been changed into great curses against their well-being, because now they appeared to be absolutely dependent for life on the wealthy few, having nothing of their own? No explanations of minor causes can answer these questions, but the great injustice of dividogenesure explains them. But what can the propertyless people do when they increase and when all the wealth and capital produced by the people are monopolized by a few families, as even the 1st and 2d tables, p. 47, show the facts? What can the 33,908,277 individuals without property do, when they have nothing to hope for but labor under the principle of dividogenesure for the wealthy few that consist of less than a million families in the enlarged nation?