act I ever knew. I cannot thank you adequately, but I hope it may be

given me to serve you some time, and should you ever need a friend’s purse, his hand or his life, mine are yours.”

I endeavored to deprecate the value of my interference and to moderate his expressions of gratitude; but he would have none of it, and, leaping to his feet, began to pace to and fro, expatiating upon what he extravagantly termed my bravery and unselfishness, and insisting upon his tremendous obligation to me. He was manifestly in earnest; but all at once habit asserted itself, the ruling passion came to the fore, and a trifle “light as air” made “confirmation strong as proof of Holy Writ.” When he first began to move a memory flashed over me, but, as those beautiful, restless white hands added their evidence, assurance became doubly sure. I could see my demure, pretty little client impersonating this man, and I knew, despite the dyed hair and the shaven beard, that I had found the missing witness. But I had found something else. I had found a man suffering from a chronic dementia. Whether his derangement was general or merely monomania, I was at a loss to determine. If the former, he was not competent as a witness for either side. If the latter, the special form and degree of alienation might or might not militate against his testimony.

I was impelled to take him unawares, and so I said suddenly: “Dr. Bently, do you remember Mrs. Abbott, the daughter of your former patient, Mrs. Johnstone, of Laneville?”

If he started or showed surprise or annoyance, it was imperceptible; but he glanced with smiling complaisance at his nails as he came over to me, and, touching my forehead, remarked, with most irritating suavity: “My dear fellow, I fear you are feverish. My name is Charles Chester Chickering. I never was in Laneville, I never had a patient named Johnstone, and I have no recollection whatever of anyone by the name of Abbott.”

He looked straight at me as he uttered these falsehoods, and his tone was like velvet. There was the flicker of an amused smile on his mouth, but his eyes were hard and cold as blued steel, the contracted pupils shining like black pinheads. I stared back at him, and presently he shifted his gaze from my face to his own right hand, which he was holding out in front of him, and again that abominable, self-satisfied smirk appeared. I was filled with boundless contempt for this man I had almost begun to pity, and as I rose from the couch and began to speak I could fairly taste the bitterness of the words I flung at him:

“Dr. or Mr. Bernard Brice Bently, Charles Chester Chickering—or whatever your infernal, alliterative _alias_ may be—I deeply regret that I should have saved you from the death I have no doubt you richly deserved, and I earnestly hope that you may be punished for your crime of helping to ruin a poor little woman and two innocent children. And, by the living God! I will do all in my power to bring you to——”

He interrupted me eagerly, wonderingly, protestingly. “What is that you say? Mrs. Abbott and her children living? Why, that scoundrel Johnstone and that she-devil of a nurse swore to Mrs. Johnstone and me that all three of them were dead and buried!”

Hope came to life again in my heart. It was a mistake, after all, and this man could and would rectify it. He had been deceived and had witnessed the document in good faith. I had commenced an apology when he uttered a violent exclamation, and, holding the backs of his hands in front of his face, scrutinized his nails with rapt intensity.

His very lips grew livid, the eyes he turned on me were those of a madman, and, snarling like a wolf, he screamed: “See what you have done! Look at my nails!” and thrust his pallid fingers forward for my inspection.

On the polished, snowy surface of every nail was a bright pink fleck or spot of about the bigness and shape of a ladybug; but I was barely conscious of these rosy marks on the intense whiteness of the uncanny things, for I suppose the smart rap of that pistol bullet and this man’s extraordinary sayings and doings had upset my fairly choleric temper, and I was literally beside myself with uncontrollable rage and indignation.

“Damn you and your dead nails!” I shouted back at him. “You cowardly liar and thief, you are Johnstone’s accomplice, and I will tear the truth out of you if I have to kill you to do it.”

We were glaring at each other like wild beasts, and, before the words were fairly out of my mouth, we sprang forward, our hands clutching hungrily at each other’s throats in the fierce desire to strangle which comes to men and the other brutes that slay when anger and hate have reached the last and deadly stage. An undercut would have driven him back, but I wanted his windpipe and he wanted mine, and each of us was sick to have the other at close quarters, so a blow would not have been fair play. We were well matched. I was sure of that as we grappled. We swayed and strained, and I could feel the blood running down my face when my wound reopened; but the end came quickly, and, as we crashed to the floor, he was underneath, and my hands flew up eagerly and clenched under his chin. Ah! the savage joy of it!

But why did he not struggle? What trick was this? Good God, had the fall killed him? How white he was! And he had been crimson a second ago. The revulsion of feeling turned me sick. Was I a murderer? I let go my hold, leaped to my feet and threw a pitcher of ice water on his head and face. He gasped, opened his eyes and regarded me calmly and quietly. Was it only a moment ago that those calm, sad eyes had been narrow rims of blue around intensely black, distended pupils that had in them the dull red glare of blood-lust? Now they were soft and human, and the light of sanity was in them.

“My friend,” he said gently—what a superb voice he had, and how the deep, rich, mellow tones brushed away anger, hatred and fear—“my friend, I owe you my life twice. First, you saved it; now, you spare it. And I owe you more than life. I owe you my restoration to reason, to perfect sanity. For I have been bitten by a mania so wild, so strange, so improbable that no man save you who have seen it would believe in its existence. ‘Like cures like.’ It came through a fall and a shock. It has been cured through a fall and a shock. You were right. I _was_ a liar. The greatest on earth, I believe, and I gloried in it, and hated to tell a truth lest it should bring a pink spot on my nails. No, don’t lift me up.”

I had attempted to raise him and had blurted out a word or two of shame, sympathy and pity.

“I prefer to lie here while I tell you the story,” he went on. “You have no cause to be ashamed; it was simple self-defense on your part, for I should probably have killed you in my paroxysm. Besides, you do not realize what you have done for me. But I thank you for your kindly sympathy; it is not wasted, believe me. Now, if you will do me a favor, watch my nails, and, if they become normal, tell me. But, first, put one of those wet compresses on your wound and slip the bandage over it. You will forgive me by and bye for fighting with a guest to whom I owed so much. I was not responsible.”

I hastened to reassure him, and he resumed:

“Before I begin my own weird tale, let me relieve your mind about that poor, wronged, sensitive child, Mrs. Abbott. I will go back with you to Laneville, and we will break that will wide open. There will be no trouble about it. Johnstone is a whelp, his wife is a criminal, and I can put them both behind the bars. That little woman shall be righted, if it takes my entire fortune to do it. Now, listen. A trifle over a year ago, getting out of my phaeton, I fell, struck my head and was out of my mind for some weeks. When I regained health and strength I found that my injury had left me with the most unthinkable hallucination that ever crept into a human brain. Subconsciously, I knew it was a vicious delusion, but I took the same delight in it that a patient partly in the control of delirium sometimes takes in the absurdities he utters.

“You know the little white marks on the nails which, as children, we used to say came from telling lies? Well, my mania was that if I told nothing _but_ lies, lied constantly and consistently, I could turn mine entirely white. I tried and I succeeded. The will, obeying a diseased mind, plays queer pranks. I was partly proud of the result of my experiment, partly ashamed of it. So I took to wearing gloves and gauntlets most of the time. I began to get a reputation as a phenomenal liar. Once I overheard a man say, ‘Dr. Bently says it is so? Then that settles it; it’s a lie that would turn Beelzebub green with envy. Why, I wouldn’t believe the doctor if he swore to anything on seventeen cubic miles of Bibles in the original Hebrew.’

“I could have hugged him with grateful delight. But friends and practice dropped away. People began to look at me askance, and before Mrs. Johnstone died she was about the only patient of our class I had left. The street urchins used to yell at me, ‘Hallo, Ananias! where’s Sapphira?’ and ‘Berny Bently; or, The Hidden Hand.’ So I came here and hid myself in this great city, where no one cares for anything but money and would make much of a rich man if he had claws, hoofs, horns and a tail all white as snow or black as ink.”

While he spoke I had watched his nails closely and curiously, and the pink spots had spread and spread, slowly but surely, until the normal, healthy color had come back to them. I told him, but he never looked at them. Instead, he got up, came over to me, took my two hands in his and said slowly and reverently: “Thank God and you, dear friend, I am cured!” His splendid eyes were filled with tears, and his exquisite voice was solemn and broken with emotion. My own eyes were rather misty, but then they were never much good; and, for a lawyer, I was quite moved. I gave him my friendship then and there, and I have never regretted it.

* * * * *

Two weeks later, starting from my own home, where Mrs. Abbott and Bently had been our most welcome guests, we all went to Laneville, where we met Mr. and Mrs. Johnstone, whom we had summoned back by cable. They made us but little trouble, being cowards as well as scoundrels. Mrs. Abbott, however—good, kindly, generous little soul—was so unfeignedly sorry for her unworthy brother that she wished to let him have the lion’s share of the big property; but we overruled the soft-hearted child-woman and made her take her full share. I had the pleasure, subsequently, of expressing to Mr. Johnstone exactly what I thought of him, and I had considerable difficulty in restraining the doctor from giving him a beating.

Not long after I began divorce proceedings for Mrs. Abbott, but her rascally husband saved her and me the annoyance of going into court by opportunely and thoughtfully dying.

My fee was the largest I have ever received from an individual client, and, in some extenuation for accepting such a small fortune, I would like to say that it was fairly forced on me by the grateful little creature I love as though she were my own child.

My wife promptly demanded, and got, her little commission of one-half, and said she was the best drummer of practice and big-paying clients that any lawyer ever had. She is, God bless her! And, by the way, we live in the Goldsborough house, and my dear lady spends a good part of her time on the piazza she bought with her half of my fee.

Oh, yes! I forgot to mention that Mrs. Abbott’s name is now Bently. They call her husband “the good physician” in our town, and his word is as good as any man’s bond. The doctor has lost interest in his hands, but his sweet and devoted little wife admires them extravagantly. They are still very handsome, but brown as berries, and his nails are as pink as yours or mine.

_Organization and Education_

BY WHARTON BARKER

The cardinal tenets of the People’s Party were declared by the founders of the Republic, established by the War of the Revolution and guaranteed to our people by the Constitution of the United States. So, by proclaiming for rule of justice, liberty and equality of opportunity, not of greed, man was made the master and money the servant. Those who believe in government of, by and for the people, who believe that the people are fitted to govern themselves, capable of discerning that which is good for them and that which is not, must approve the contention the People’s Party makes; must oppose the aggression of concentrated capital; must see the need of immediate independent political action outside and apart from both Republican and Democratic Parties, both dominated by the money cliques.

The money oligarchy, now in control of all lines of finance, transportation, distribution and of most lines of production, works for the profit of the few to the great detriment of the many. These plutocrats control a slavish metropolitan press, in order that the masses of our people may be governed for the benefit of the few.

If this control is to stand, if millions of people are to slave for a few thousand, it is necessary that the many have no direct hand in their own government, that the many delegate to representatives their power, and that such representatives should be influenced so as to become the representatives of the few. The people must have only the semblance of power, the representatives the real power, in order that governing may be carried on for the advantage of the rulers, not of the ruled.

So we have nominating conventions run by political bosses, legislative bodies taking orders from agents of the money cliques, who purchase franchises for railway lines and for other public utilities; election laws that make independent voting almost impossible.

Until we have direct nominations the people will be the willing or unwilling tools of the men who dictate nominations, and they must make choice between the candidates set up for them. For years the Republican and Democratic politicians who run conventions have been the agents of the money oligarchy that deals in and fattens upon all kinds of public franchises. So the plutocrats make of our Government an instrument for the oppression of the many and the enrichment of the few. In order to promote the governing of our people by the few and for the few, promote legislation that will impoverish and weaken the many but aggrandize the few in riches and power, it is necessary that law-making should be intrusted to representatives; that these representatives should be put more and more out of touch with the people and more in touch with the few; that these representatives should be removed further and further from responsibility to the people; that their doings should be hidden and not subject to review.

So we have demands for extended terms of office; we have opposition to the election of President and senators by popular vote; we have opposition to the selection of Federal judges other than by appointment of the President and Senate; we have, above all, opposition to direct popular voting upon questions of public policy, upon granting public franchises.

The referendum is opposed because it would make all laws passed by legislative bodies subject to review and reversal by a high court, the court of the whole people entering verdict through the ballot-box. There is little outward opposition to the principle of direct legislation. There is much covert opposition from the money oligarchy and much plainer opposition born of ignorance from the body of the people.

Those who oppose direct legislation hold that the people are not fitted to govern themselves, that the few are fitted by divine law to rule, that the many are condemned to be ruled for the benefit of the few by a law equally divine. This is the law of kings; it is not the law of democracy. He who holds it is false to our theory of government, is no better than a monarchist.

Give us direct legislation, such as the initiative and referendum would establish, and there will be an end to sale of franchises by representatives and no laws will be enacted to rob the people of their rights and property. The place to begin with direct voting is in nomination of all candidates for public office—a People’s Party must abolish all delegate conventions for making nominations and platforms; must adopt direct voting for candidates and for declarations of principles; must have voting precinct clubs for party management. The district and subdivision plan of organization adopted by the Cincinnati convention of 1900 is the best plan of organization heretofore proposed, and it should be put into immediate operation unless a better plan can be proposed without delay, for it will insure rule of the people in party management and destroy the power of the political boss who goes into politics for profit.

If the People’s Party will at once declare for a rank-and-file plan of organization and management we will see a rush to arms in all states, for in all the rule of the boss, serving the money oligarchy, is most offensive. The time has come for such a People’s Party; there is no place for a People’s Party run on the lines of the Republican and Democratic Parties.

The day of the hero-led party has passed. The great majority Mr. Roosevelt received is no evidence to the contrary, for more than three million citizens out of seventeen million abstained from voting at the last election. Organization and education of the body of the people must come through voting precinct organizers and educators—of course the printed matter must for economy be prepared and sent out from central offices, from national headquarters, but no proper, no effective distribution of it can be made except by the precinct organizers.

If the people are to win a national victory there must be from three to five honest, able, aggressive, patriotic men in each of the one hundred thousand voting districts of the country working by day and by night. These men must awaken their immediate neighbors to a lively appreciation of the wrongs they suffer and point out the way to re-establishment of their rights, the way to restoration of justice, liberty and equality of opportunity. When such an army is in the field the people will defeat the money oligarchy, but not before.

At the election of 1904, I repeat, three million citizens refused to vote because they would not stultify themselves by voting for either Roosevelt or Parker, both candidates of the plutocrats. At least two million citizens voted for Roosevelt because they wished to destroy the Democratic Party, a party for years without fixed principles. These five million citizens, together with the eight hundred thousand citizens who voted for Debs, Watson and Swallow, represented the reform and dissatisfied vote of the country—five months since. The action of the Beef Trust, of the Railroad Combination and of allied interests, all in control of twenty men, and the now openly declared purpose of President Roosevelt and Secretary Hay to establish in foreign affairs an American-British alliance, alarm many millions of our citizens as they have not been alarmed before.

A new epoch in our country opens now, for people and plutocrats are in a death struggle. The principle the People’s Party stands for is that man is the master, money the servant. The question—is the People’s Party equal to the duty of the time?—must be answered at once. If it goes into the campaign immediately with a voting precinct organization such as was declared for by the Cincinnati convention of 1900, the answer will be affirmative.

The cardinal tenets of the party of the people are:

1. Brotherhood of man, love, justice, liberty and equality of opportunity.

2. Government by the people—the recognition of the right of the people to rule themselves by establishment of direct legislation, the initiative and the referendum.

3. Honest money—national money, not bank money—that will serve creditor and debtor alike; that will insure stability of prices, thus be an honest measure of value, and thereby encourage honest industry and discourage speculation.

4. Nationalization of railroads and other monopolies that must be public rather than private monopolies.

5. Prevention of overcapitalization of all corporations, of overcharge for services rendered the public by such corporations.

6. Abolition of industrial trusts, those that exist because of tariff protection and those that exist because of freight discriminations whether by rebates, special rates or otherwise.

7. Taxation that will tax every man according to his accumulated wealth—tax property, not man; collect state and municipal taxes by direct tax on the accumulated wealth of society assessed at actual cash value; collect national taxes by a direct tax on the earnings of accumulated wealth, whether large or small. Have only direct taxes, for indirect taxes cover injustice and extravagance.

8. Foreign policy that will keep our country out of all entangling alliances with European and Asiatic countries, and strengthen our economic relations with all American countries that have different soil, climate and products from those of the United States.

These are the demands of the People’s Party, the cardinal principles for which that party contends. They are all simple, easily understood, and must have approval of a great majority of the American people when brought to them for consideration by a party of the rank and file, controlled by the people themselves, not dictated to by the money oligarchy; by a party that stands for the interests of the many, not of the few. I close, as I began, by saying we need organization and education.

_The Panic of 1893_

BY W. S. MORGAN

Hon. THOMAS E. WATSON, _Thomson, Ga._

MY DEAR SIR—I have your letter containing communications from James R. Branch, Secretary of the American Bankers’ Association, New York City, and Jno. D. Reynolds, President of First National Bank, of Rome, Ga., in which they deny the authenticity of the Panic Bulletin published in my contribution to the March issue of your magazine.

I remember when the Bulletin was first made public I asked a friend, a president of the Citizens’ National Bank, of Fort Scott, Kan., a man with whom I was intimately connected in business for ten or twelve years, if such a circular had been issued. He replied that he had received a number of circulars covering the propositions therein contained, and that likely he had received that one. This incident, and the fact that the Bulletin had been published from time to time for years and I had not seen its authenticity questioned, and furthermore that its suggestions were in line with the events of that date, led me to believe that it was genuine.

However, the authenticity of the circular was not the subject matter of the article which provoked these denials. My indictment of the National Bankers was not merely for issuing the Bulletin, but for doing the things it suggested. Messrs. Branch and Reynolds have ignored the indictment and attacked the witness. But there are other witnesses that can’t be demolished.

After Mr. Cleveland had sent Henry Villard and Don M. Dickinson to Washington, in the winter of 1893, and failed to secure from the Fifty-second Congress the repeal of the purchasing clause of the Sherman law, the National Bankers began to show their hand.

It was seen that no ordinary pressure on Congress would secure the demonetization of silver. It was claimed that the Panic Bulletin was issued March 8, just four days after Cleveland’s second inauguration.

What was the program laid down in the Panic Bulletin?

1. The interests of the National Banks require immediate financial legislation.

2. Silver, silver certificates and Treasury notes must be retired and National Bank-notes, upon a gold basis, be made the only kind of paper money.

3. Bonds required to be issued as a basis for the bank-note circulation.

4. Pressure must be brought upon the people, especially in sections of the country where the free silver sentiment was strong. Circulation to be reduced, loans called in, credit refused and general distrust spread broadcast through the land.

5. Demand for an extra session of Congress to repeal the purchasing clause of the Sherman law.

This was the program laid down by the Bulletin. Did it agree with the action of the National Bankers? We shall see.

On the 11th of April, 1893, Grover Cleveland appointed Conrad C. Jordan to be Assistant Treasurer of the United States.

In this capacity Jordan had control of the Sub-Treasury at New York. The Sub-Treasury is the great business establishment of the Federal Government. It is one of the associated banks of New York City.

Jordan was a banker, the President of the Western National, of New York City, and was recommended for the position by the New York National Bank Presidents. He was the go-between—the link which connected the National Bankers with Cleveland and the Federal Government.

His nomination was confirmed on the 15th day of April, and on the 20th he was in Washington with his bond and conferring with Cleveland.

From that hour things moved with wonderful rapidity.

Jordan left Washington on the 21st, arrived in New York at 5.30 in the afternoon, went directly to the Chase National Bank, No. 15 Nassau Street, where he met Henry W. Cannon, President of the Chase National Bank, and J. Edward Simmons, President of the Fourth National, two of the most active and influential of those who controlled the associated banks and who constitute the “New York National Bank Ring.”

It must have been an important meeting, for that night Cannon left New York for Washington on a midnight train, arriving in Washington Saturday morning, April 22, and while there had interviews with Grover Cleveland. On the morning of April 22 Jordan was sworn into office, and his first act, official or semi-official, was to arrange for a meeting with certain National Bank Presidents in the afternoon.

I can give you the names of most of the National Bank Presidents who met Jordan that afternoon. The meeting was said to be informal, and its proceedings were carefully guarded. But it was of such importance that Jordan went to Washington on a late evening train to make a report of its proceedings.

It was generally believed at the time, and there is little doubt of its truth, that Jordan was simply given the office to mask his character as confidential agent between Grover Cleveland and the New York National Bank Presidents.

After a conference with Cleveland on Sunday morning, April 23, Jordan and Cannon returned to New York, arriving there late in the evening. Before leaving Washington Jordan wired certain National Bank Presidents to meet him at a private house uptown.

What happened at that meeting we can only surmise. I mention it to show the connection between the National Bank Presidents and Grover Cleveland.

The next morning, April 24, Jordan was at his desk. One of the first things he did was to notify the National Bank Presidents and officers of trusts and other companies to meet him that day at the Sub-Treasury. This also was a dark-lantern meeting, and no one would give out the proceedings. But what followed shortly afterward, and the action taken by those who attended that meeting, justifies the belief that that convention was called for the purpose of arranging a concerted attack upon the national industries, agriculture, commerce, property and social order of the American people—the assault to be directed by the New York National Bank Presidents—as the swiftest and surest means of forcing Congress to repeal the silver law—to give the country Cleveland’s “Object-Lesson.”

Nine National Bank Presidents met John G. Carlisle at the Williams House on April 27, presumably to complete the arrangements for the attack. No doubt Cleveland had approved the conclusions reached on the 24th, and sent Carlisle to sanction them.

Carlisle’s meeting with the Bank Presidents that day was, as you know, a subject of much newspaper comment. The meeting was said to have been one of “effusive cordiality,” and, in view of the events which quickly followed, there is little doubt but what it partook of the nature of “two hearts that beat as one.”

It was there that the National Bankers proposed an issue of bonds. But Carlisle, like a young girl, although keen to marry, intimated that it was “too sudden.”

This was the last of the series of meetings between the Government officials and the National Bank Presidents preceding the panic.

Everything was now ready to give the country the “Object-Lesson.”

Within the next forty-eight hours the worst financial calamity that ever befell the people was to break upon them.

At this time there was nothing in the industrial situation to precipitate a panic. Prices had been low for several years, and there was none of the spirit of speculation which usually precedes a panic.

Cleveland himself volunteered to say: “Our unfortunate financial plight is not the result of untoward events, nor of conditions relating to our natural resources, nor is it traceable to any of the afflictions which frequently check national growth and prosperity. With plenteous crops, with abundant promise of remunerative production and manufacture, with unusual invitation to safe investment and with satisfactory assurance to business enterprise, suddenly financial distrust and fear have sprung up on every side.”

Thus the people and all those engaged in industrial and productive enterprises are exonerated.

Who are the guilty persons?

The men who did just what that Panic Bulletin describes.

The bankers who demanded the practical demonetization of silver; who demanded a special session of Congress to secure it; who called in their loans and reduced their circulation; who demanded and secured the issue of bonds, and who now demand the retirement of the greenbacks.

Messrs. Branch and Reynolds and other National Bank advocates may be able to repudiate the Panic Bulletin, but they cannot successfully deny that every feature of the program it contained was carried out in detail by the men who practically control the National Bank system.

Four days after the Williams House meeting at which Secretary Carlisle was present, the New York banks began to call in their loans with brutal vindictiveness.

We are not left to conjecture the effect of such a policy on the New York Exchange. By the 5th of May the strain had become intense. The New York _Tribune_ of May 6, referring to the condition of the market, said: “The enormous losses of the last week, the utter demoralization of the buying power in the market and the practical paralysis of credit, promised a liquidation that, unless stayed, would have swept them all off their feet.”

On May 7 the same paper said: “The effort of the Administration to bring the South and West to a full realization of the inevitable consequences of compulsory purchases of silver bullion has brought distress and perhaps ruin to many innocent persons—but there is no reason to suppose that it will be relaxed.”

Within ten days from the time of the Williams House meeting between Cleveland’s Secretary of the Treasury and the National Bank Presidents the panic had spread from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and for forty days it continued with unabated fury. On the 9th of May several Western banks were forced to close their doors.

“There is no lack of pressure,” said the New York _Tribune_ on the 22d of May.

On the 6th of June—six weeks after the Williams House meeting—the New York _Sun_, in its money article, said: “The Presidents of the New York National Banks think that the so-called “Object-Lesson” has been carried far enough. They see nothing to be gained by a further shrinkage of values and unsettling of credits.”

It is useless for me to detail the results of the panic.

From May 9 to 30, inclusive, sixty banks were forced to suspend, and fifty-eight of them were in the doomed section—the South, West and Northwest.

From the time of the Williams House meeting, April 27, to December 30, 1893, a period of eight months, more than fifteen thousand bankruptcies and suspensions had occurred. Over six hundred banks had been driven to the wall, and the loss to the country in round numbers was SEVEN HUNDRED AND FIFTY MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

But the National Bank Presidents had won their fight. They had carried out the program laid down in the Panic Bulletin, an extra session of Congress had been called and the purchasing clause repealed.

That the “Object-Lesson” was intended for the West and South is evidenced by the records. Out of 169 banks failing from March 5 to August 4, five only were in Eastern States, forty-eight in Southern and 151 in Western states—Dunn’s Report.

Dunn’s Report for July 21, 1893, says: “A large proportion of the suspended Colorado banks and mercantile institutions will pay in full and resume business, inability to borrow money on or sell ample collateral alone being the cause of the Denver banks closing their doors.”

No doubt the panic reached proportions not at first intended by the National Bank Presidents and threatened their own financial standing, as Mr. Branch suggests is the case in time of panics. But they had a remedy, no doubt decided upon beforehand. While they refused credit to the Southern and Western banks, they issued Clearing House certificates to the extent of $63,152,000 to themselves, an act which was in violation of the law.

There is so much evidence obtainable to the effect that the National Bankers are guilty of every count in the indictment contained in the Panic Bulletin that a book could be filled with it.

In a speech in the United States Senate August 25, 1893, Senator David B. Hill, referring to the bankers, said: “They inaugurated the policy of refusing loans to the people even upon the best security, and attempted in every way to spread disaster broadcast throughout the land. These disturbers—the promoters of public peril—represented largely the creditor class, the men who desire to appreciate the gold dollar in order to subserve their own selfish interests, men who revel in hard times, men who drive harsh bargains with their fellow-men regardless of financial distress. It is not strange that the present panic has been induced, intensified and protracted by reason of these malign influences. Having contributed much to bring about the present exigency, these men are now unable to control it. They have sown the wind, and we are now all reaping the whirlwind together” (_Congressional Record_, Vol. XXV, Part I, p. 865).

August 8, 1893, Senator Teller said, in a speech in the United States Senate:

“It is the height of folly that this is a panic caused by distrust of the currency.” On the 29th of the same month the Senator from Colorado, referring to the Williams House meeting of Secretary Carlisle with the New York National Bank Presidents, said: “It is a most remarkable interview; it will go far to support the charges which I am not going to make on my own authority, but which I am going to make upon the authority of others, that this panic is a bankers’ panic, brought by the action of the New York banks, and brought about for distinct purposes, which purposes were practically avowed on the 27th of April. The same things have been reiterated by the financial papers, and the policy is still continued up to the present hour. It had two objects in view. One was to secure from the United States a large issue of bonds, and the other to secure the repeal of the much-abused Sherman law.”

The records show that the bankers accomplished both of these objects. They secured the repeal of the purchasing clause, and afterward the issue of $262,000,000 in bonds.

In the same speech Senator Teller said: “There are many banks in the West, and some that I know of, which shut their doors because they could not draw the money that they had on deposit in New York” (_Congressional Record_, Vol. XXV, Part I, p. 1022).

In its issue of August 20, 1893, the Chicago _Inter-Ocean_ said:

“When the future historian tells the world of the great financial panic of 1893, he will say: ‘In the winter and spring months of that year the New York bankers and financiers sowed the wind, and in the summer months reaped the whirlwind.’

“We know of no arrangement of words that can more graphically describe the action of the New York financiers and the results of that action. Colonel Ingersoll, early in the season of disturbance, properly called this a ‘bankers’ panic.’ Nor are the New York bankers alone to blame. Those of Boston and Philadelphia come in for their share.”

But it is useless for me to continue to pile up testimony to further sustain my contention. Whether the Panic Bulletin is a “canard” or not, its suggestions were carried into effect. The bankers opposed silver, and, for the purpose of having the law providing for its issue repealed, they precipitated the panic and used the methods described in the Bulletin to accomplish their ends. They are opposed to greenbacks, and if necessary will, I have no doubt, precipitate another panic in order to have them retired. And it all goes to show that the control of the currency should be taken out of their hands.

W. S. MORGAN.

_Hardy, Ark._

_The Cradle of Tears_

BY THEODORE DREISER _Author of “Sister Carrie”_

There is a cradle within the door of one of the great institutions of New York before which a constantly recurring tragedy is being enacted. It is a plain cradle, quite simply draped in white, but with such a look of cozy comfort about it that one would scarcely suspect it to be a cradle of sorrow.

A little white bed with a neatly turned-back coverlet is made up within it. A long strip of white muslin, tied in a tasteful bow at the top, drapes its rounded sides. About it, but within the precincts of warmth and comfort, of which it is a fort, spreads a chamber of silence—a quiet, solemn, plainly furnished room, the appearance of which emphasizes the peculiarity of the cradle itself.

If the mind were not familiar with the details with which it is so startlingly associated, the question would naturally arise as to what it was doing there—why it should be standing there alone. No one seems to be watching it. It has not the slightest appearance of usefulness, and yet there it stands, day after day, and year after year—a ready prepared cradle and no infant to live in it.

And yet this cradle is the most useful and, in a way, the most inhabited cradle in the world. Day after day, and year after year, it is the recipient of more small wayfaring souls than any other cradle in the world. In it the real children of sorrow are placed, and over it more tears are shed than if it were an open grave.

It is the place where annually 1,200 foundlings are placed, many of them by mothers who are too helpless or too unfortunately environed to be further able to care for their child, and the misery which compels it makes of the little open crib a cradle of tears.

The interest of this particular cradle is, that it has been the silent witness of more truly heartbreaking scenes than any other cradle since the world began. For nearly thirty-five years it has stood where it does today, ready-draped, open, while as many thousand mothers have stolen shamefacedly in and, after looking hopelessly about, have laid their helpless offspring within its depths.

For thirty-five years, winter and summer, in the bitterest cold and the most stifling heat, it has seen them come—the poor, the rich; the humble, the proud; the beautiful, the homely—and one by one they have laid their children down and brooded over them, wondering whether it were possible for human love to make so great a sacrifice and yet not die.

And then when the child has been actually sacrificed, when by the simple act of releasing their hold upon it and turning away they have actually allowed it to pass out from their love and tenderness into the world unknown, this silent cradle has seen them smite their hands in anguish and yield to such voiceless tempests of grief as only those know who have loved much and lost all.

The circumstances under which this peculiar charity comes to be a part of the life of the great metropolis need not be rehearsed here. The heartlessness of men, the frailty of women, the brutality of all those who sit in judgment in spite of the fact that they do not wish to be judged themselves, is so old and so commonplace that its repetition is almost a weariness.

Still the tragedy repeats itself, and year after year, and day after day the unlocked door is opened and dethroned virtue enters—the victim of ignorance and passion and affection, and a child is robbed of an honorable home.

_The Racing Trust_

BY THOMAS B. FIELDERS

The only Trust that has the sincere and earnest and unfaltering support of the daily press is the most audacious, the most grasping, the most immoral of all trusts. This is the Racing Trust. There are hundreds of trusts in this country. All corporations that have eliminated or lessened competition to a marked degree are called trusts. It is asserted, commonly, that such combinations are against the laws of the states that form the Union and are in opposition to the Federal Constitution. If the Beef Trust or the Sugar Trust or the Standard Oil Trust have advocates among the daily newspapers of the country, these advocates are not earning their salt, to say nothing of their salaries. The only support they have the courage to give is silence. Yet it has to be proven that these trusts have infringed the law.

In the case of the Racing Trust there is no doubt. There is none to deny that it is an absolute monopoly. It conducts business in open defiance of the law and the Constitution. It has the avarice of a miser, and the impudent shamelessness of a courtezan. All who will help to fill its maw are received with open arms. Lacking morals, it expects none of its patrons. Within its portals the scum of humanity is made as welcome as the cream. It has its rules, but these are without and beyond the law, though, curiously, they are enforced by so-called guardians of the law. The Beef Trust, by its rapacious methods, may make vegetarians; the Racing Trust makes outcasts, who, sometimes, rise to the dignity of convicts. The Beef Trust shuns advertisement; the Racing Trust welcomes it. Any reputable undertaking must pay heavily for the support of the press; the Racing Trust gets such support in columns per day for a ridiculously small subvention. The press poses as a teacher of morality. In the case of the Racing Trust it plays the part of a panderer without getting the price insisted upon by that unutterable in any other walk of life.

Americans believe that they possess a quality of humor that is far superior to that which bears the hall-mark of any other nationality. ’Tis a comfortable belief, for it enables them to live cheerfully under conditions which would not be tolerated elsewhere. There are several kinds of humorists among us, and of these the men who make inadequate laws, or laws which they know will be broken, and the men who break them and go unpunished are worthy of more and of a different sort of attention than they receive. People growl at the Beef Trust on account of the high prices of beef, though Mr. Garfield, who was instructed by the President to investigate that Trust, has said that its profits are only moderate.

What of the profits of the Racing Trust? Monte Carlo is described invariably as the most delectable gold mine in the world. In ordinary gold mines the vein may be “pinched out”; in Monte Carlo it runs on forever. Games made by gamblers for gamblers are called games of chance. There is little humor in your gambler, else he would recognize the absence of chance. Many thousands have tried to “break the bank” at Monte Carlo. Nobody has succeeded, for while play is conducted there honestly, the games are of the “sure thing” variety, as the percentage is always in favor of the bank. But the shareholders of the Casino at Monte Carlo are satisfied with twenty per cent. per annum on their investment and, sometimes, get less. And let it be remembered that in conducting their business they do not break the law.

The Racing Trust would scorn to accept anything so paltry as twenty per cent. on its investment, yet it is a law-breaker for seven months of the year, on six days of the week, and in the course of time, doubtless, will break it on the seventh day of the week also.

Laws against gambling have existed from time beyond count, just as they have existed against murder and other crimes against public welfare. The Constitution of the state of New York prohibited all kinds of gambling until 1887. In that year the Legislature passed the “Ives Pool bill.” Ives was a member of the Legislature from this city. Except that he piloted this particular bill through a legislature which was paid to adopt it, his name would have been forgotten. The bill called by his name suspended the provisions of the Penal Code relating to gambling at race-tracks. It limited racing between May 15 and October 15. It limited racing upon any track to thirty days. It permitted bookmaking upon the tracks. In return for enormous privileges the racing associations were to pay to the state five per cent. of their gross receipts. The law confined gambling to the tracks, and in order to take full advantage of it, and also, of course, to improve the breed of racing stock, philanthropists of the convict stripe opened tracks where racing was conducted at night as well as by day, in winter as well as in summer. The manner in which racing was conducted became a public scandal. The horse was the principal factor, and, generally, was used as a means to an end. There were, of course, owners and trainers and jockeys who were honest, even under the Ives Pool law, but these were very much in a minority. The “sport” reeked with dishonesty. Horses were “pulled,” trainers and jockeys were “stiffened.” Some of the racing officials not only winked at “crookedness,” but took part in it. Unless the starter of those days had a piece of every “good thing,” it did not “come off” if he could prevent it. None talked of the improvement “of the breed” except with tongue in cheek. “Jobs” were discussed, after the event, as if they had been meritorious performances. When these were the work of trainers and jockeys the bookmakers were derided; when they were planned and realized by bookmakers the latter were cursed. There was much cursing in those days, as there was much reason for it, but the profanity was not due to the failure of honest, but dishonest effort. Women as well as men were allowed to bet, and the race-tracks were hotbeds of debauchery. The great body of those who were interested in racing was beyond the pale. The refuse of the country camped in New York while the orgy lasted, and so obnoxious did these bandits make themselves that an organized effort was made to induce the constitutional convention which met in 1895 to cleanse the state of the filth which was bred by the Ives Pool law.

This convention appointed a committee, whose duty it was to prepare an address to the people of the state. The address dealt with the work of the convention. The committee called attention to the anti-gambling amendment adopted by the convention in the following language: “The passion for gambling to which the system of lotteries formerly ministered has found fresh opportunity under the so-called Ives Pool bill, and, under color and pretext of betting upon horse races, is working widespread demoralization and ruin among the young and weak throughout the community. We have extended the prohibition against lotteries so as to include pool-selling, bookmaking and other forms of gambling. It is claimed that this provision will array in opposition to the proposed Constitution a great and unscrupulous money power; but we appeal to the virtue and sound judgment of the people to sustain the position which we have taken.”

This address was signed by Messrs. Joseph H. Choate (Ambassador to England), Elihu Root, H. T. Cookinham, Elon R. Brown, Chester B. McLaughlin, Milo M. Acker, Daniel H. McMillan and M. H. Hirschberg.

The anti-gambling amendment, which was adopted by the convention with only four dissenting votes, was as follows:

“The delegates of the People of the state of New York, in convention assembled, do propose as follows:

“Section 10 of Article I of the Constitution is hereby amended so as to read: ‘No law shall be passed abridging the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the Government or any department thereof; nor shall any divorce be granted otherwise than by judicial proceedings; _nor shall any lottery or the sale of lottery tickets, pool-selling, bookmaking or any kind of gambling hereafter be authorized or allowed within this state, and the Legislature shall pass appropriate laws to prevent offenses against any of the provisions of this section_.’”

The “great and unscrupulous money power” to which Mr. Choate and his associates alluded was that of the racing associations. Their power was felt in the convention, and some of those who discussed the amendment prior to its adoption claimed that it was offered at the suggestion of one set of gamblers (poolroom keepers) against another set of gamblers (the racing associations). This was true enough. The racing associations were as grasping then as they are now. Their members claimed that the poolroom was a nefarious and demoralizing influence. Why? Because it prevented the racing associations from having a monopoly of the petty as well as the big gamblers’ money—of the cash of those who had not time to go to the races as well as of those who were unable to go. The engines of the law were stoked up and run full tilt against the poolrooms at the behest of the racing associations; therefore, in self-defense, the poolroom keepers were anxious that all gamblers should be placed on the same level; hence the anti-gambling amendment to the Constitution. Mr. Telusky, who offered the amendment as a resolution, said that if any member of the convention “can name one man in the state of New York that is in the bookmaking business that is not a thief, a blackguard or an ex-convict, I will withdraw my resolution. I say, Mr. President, every bookmaker in the state of New York, no matter where he comes from, is nothing but an ex-convict, a cracksman, a pickpocket, a thief of the lowest character, and these men come here and desire to shut this (amendment) out because the Legislature of a few years ago legalized a certain kind of gambling, and they are trying to protect them.”

Mr. Edward Lauterbach paid his compliments to the racing associations in plain language. “Their nefarious establishments,” he said, “have been erected from Montauk Point to Niagara Falls, and the state treasury has received and distributed to the county fairs a few miserable shekels, which it has reserved as its share of the plunder. _Why, for every dollar that the state has received, it has expended ten dollars to support those who have become inmates of its prisons by reason of the weak policy so pursued._ You are all familiar with the terrible temptation of this alluring vice. The passion of gambling is pandered to in this fashion in the most insidious manner. Exaggerated accounts of great winnings are presented to the readers of every journal. Tens of thousands of young men and women have been hurled to their ruin through the instrumentality of the state that should have protected them. Gambling has already been made unlawful. If anyone desires to legalize any one branch of gambling by the suggestion of proposed amendment (to the anti-gambling amendment), let us say to him, Never. Let us pass this amendment, so that, once enacted into a law, it may carry out its beneficent purpose and not prove a sham and a deceit. Just as it was as reported let us have this amendment—no subterfuge, no change, no alterations; make no halfway work. Sweep the whole brood together—gamblers, pool-sellers, bookmakers, all the racing fraternity—into oblivion forever. Pass this amendment now, as it is, unaltered and unchanged. True horse fanciers—the Bonners, the Lorillards, the Belmonts, the Keenes and the rest—will thank you for the protection you thus afford to their legitimate pursuit. Only the gambler, who should be a pariah and an outcast, and not the state’s associate, will have cause for regret.”

It was said at the time that the racing associations and the bookmakers had collected a fund of $700,000, and intended to use it in buying enough votes in the convention to defeat the anti-gambling amendment. Who said it? The newspapers. True? Not at all likely. The racing associations were able to raise such a fund, but would have got little assistance from the bookmakers. The latter were an asset of the racing associations and knew it; they must be taken care of. ’Twas said, when Mr. Jerome was at Albany championing the Dowling bill, that the gamblers of New York had contributed $100,000 for the purchase of the Black Horse Cavalry in the Legislature. The press gave Troy as the headquarters of the gamblers’ committee. There was no such committee. The gamblers of New York, including Canfield, who had more at stake than any other gambler, did not contribute a dollar for the purpose of killing the Dowling bill. The latter was passed with surprising ease in Assembly and Senate, and had become a law before the “clever division” had begun to think of the possibility of such a result. This law, in the hands of Mr. Jerome, has proved rather embarrassing to the gambling fraternity, and may give him an opportunity of distinguishing himself in a manner after his own heart before many weeks have passed.

The anti-gambling amendment to the Constitution was ratified by a popular majority of nearly 90,000 votes. Some of the voters believed, doubtless, that it would eliminate betting on race-tracks. These forgot that the amendment was of little worth unless the Legislature made such gambling an offense and also made a punishment to fit the offense. The Legislature which followed the adoption of the Constitution was “open to reason.” How much money was required to salve its conscience I do not know, but the manner in which it replied to the demand of the popular vote shows that it was dishonest. By the anti-gambling clause of the Constitution it was ordered to “pass appropriate laws to prevent offenses against any of the provisions of this section.” Instead of obeying such mandate it adopted the Percy-Gray law, which makes gambling in poolrooms a felony and gambling on race-tracks a misdemeanor. In other words, if the keeper of a poolroom takes a bet on a horse race he commits a felony and can be sent to jail, for according to the law he has committed a penal offense, whereas if a bookmaker accepts your money on the same race he does not commit a felony and you are at liberty to publish yourself as a poor sort of creature by attempting to recover your money by civil action. Class legislation? It looks like it. But class legislation is unconstitutional. That is the general opinion, but in this particular case many thousands of dollars have been spent in an effort to discover whether or not the present racing law is unconstitutional, and the dollars have been thrown away.

The situation would be amusing did it not demonstrate the power of money. To the average mind it would seem as if the constitutional convention had barred all kinds of gambling, particularly gambling on race-tracks. Yet, under the fostering care of the Racing Trust, the volume of gambling at race-tracks is at least thrice as great today as it was in 1895. Before the convention met the Racing Trust was permitted to do business for five months in the year; now it does business for seven months. Under the Ives Pool law, which was wiped out as vicious, the tracks were limited to thirty days of racing; now the Jockey Club does as it pleases in the matter of dates. Under a law which is, upon its face, unconstitutional because it discriminates, the Racing Commission, a state institution, has the power to issue or refuse licenses. The Racing Commission is under the control of the Jockey Club, and the latter is the ruler of the racing associations. The Jockey Club, of which Mr. August Belmont is the head, is lord of all it surveys in the metropolitan circuit, to say nothing of the Bennings race-track, in which a majority of the stock is owned by Mr. Belmont. Racing began at Bennings on March 23, and its dates are not included in the seven months of racing in the metropolitan circuit.

In this circuit there are seven tracks, not counting the Buffalo track, which is controlled by the Racing Trust. The track at Morris Park, the most picturesque race-course in the United States, has been relegated to obscurity, as it was not owned by the Racing Trust, but was leased at an annual rental of $45,000. Belmont Park, which is owned by Mr. August Belmont, the head of the Racing Trust, has taken its place. The associations which are controlled by the Racing Trust are capitalized as follows:

Westchester Racing Association (Belmont Park) $1,500,000 Queens County Jockey Club (Aqueduct) 700,000 Metropolitan jockey Club (Jamaica) 550,000 Coney Island Jockey Club (Sheepshead Bay) 525,000 Brooklyn Jockey Club (Gravesend) 500,000 Brighton Beach Racing Association 300,000 Buffalo Racing Association 200,000 Saratoga Association for the Improvement of the Breed of Horses 50,000 ---------- Total $4,325,000

These figures were obtained from the Secretary of State, the Hon. John F. O’Brien. In any calculations that may be made the capitalization of Belmont Park should be eliminated and the rental of Morris Park, $45,000, substituted for $1,500,000, in order to show how thriving a concern the Racing Trust is. It will be understood, of course, that the capitalization of these concerns may be a trifle, just a trifle, higher than the actual value of the said tracks and appurtenances, except in the case of the Saratoga track, which was built solely “for the improvement of the breed of horses.”

For the right to do business on these tracks the Racing Trust pays, or is supposed to pay, to the state five per cent. upon the gross earnings of said tracks. Among the duties of the Racing Commission is the supervision of these receipts. The commission consists of Messrs. August Belmont, John Sanford and E. D. Morgan. Mr. Belmont is the president of the Westchester Racing Association (Belmont Park), and the largest owner of stock in the Racing Trust. Mr. Sanford is the power at Saratoga, and does not race until the season opens at the Spa. Attached to the Racing Commission is a State Inspector of Races. Until he was appointed to a position in the Internal Revenue Department the place was filled by Charles W. Anderson, a colored man. Reports of gross receipts are made to the State Comptroller by the racing associations and by the State Inspector of Races. It is not impossible that the latter official takes such figures as are offered to him, and it is difficult to imagine that he ever objected to them on the score of inaccuracy or any other score.

The reports of gross receipts made by the members of the Racing Trust to the State Comptroller for the years 1900, 1901, 1902, 1903 and 1904 are as follows (the figures were obtained from the State Comptroller, the Hon. Otto Kelsey):

1900. 1901. 1902. Coney Island Jockey Club $494,895.06 $640,327.97 $820,184.18 Brooklyn Jockey Club 474,887.88 593,472.72 761,394.65 Brighton Beach 307,311.30 407,611.75 502,940.25 Westchester 323,041.23 432,187.86 571,178.79 Saratoga 137,248.21 272,612.24 359,342.40 Metropolitan Queens 164,555.14 225,417.69 324,177.82 Buffalo 62,519.80 ------------ ------------- ------------- Totals $1,901,938.82 $2,571,630.23 $3,401,737.89

1903. 1904. Coney Island Jockey Club $903,128.84 $854,421.20 Brooklyn Jockey Club 790,054.07 731,559.26 Brighton Beach 559,348.00 626,837.10 Westchester 623,131.27 566,143.62 Saratoga 439,649.49 393,550.09 Metropolitan 355,270.70 307,396.03 Queens 282,900.88 218,729.16 Buffalo 60,857.63 106,489.05 ------------- ------------- Totals $4,014,340.88 $3,805,125.51

The reader will notice the exactness with which the racing associations make up their gross receipts—the “twenty cents” of the Coney Island Jockey Club, the “nine cents” of the Saratoga “Association for the Improvement of the Breed of Horses,” and so on. The reader will notice, also, that the gross receipts for last year were $209,215.37 less than those of 1903, though the press was unanimous in declaring that last year’s racing was the greatest, which means the most profitable of all years. The five per cent. paid to the state last year by the Racing Trust amounted to $190,256.27. This five per cent. is “the penny in the dollar” alluded to by Mr. Edward Lauterbach in his address to the constitutional convention. But ridiculously small as it is, why does the Racing Trust give it to the state? Simply as a sop to the rural legislator and his constituents. The dweller in cities may lack some or many of the virtues, but when it is necessary to find the highest plane of parsimonious hypocrisy one must needs pay a visit to the rural districts. This five per cent., which smacks so much of Iscariot’s thirty pieces of silver, is divided among such agricultural societies as give annual fairs, and to farmers’ institutes. Ostensibly it is intended for the improvement of agriculture; in reality much of it is given as purses for trotting races at the said county fairs. Without the support of the rural element the Racing Trust would not have succeeded in getting the adoption of the Percy-Gray racing law.

The profits of the Racing Trust are enormous. Take the Coney Island Jockey Club, for instance. Mr. Leonard Jerome, who was a sportsman who never made money out of sport, built the Sheepshead Bay track at a cost of $125,000. The grounds of the Coney Island Jockey Club belong to the people and were filched from them by an act of the Legislature. Improvements were made since the track was built, but the actual legal belongings of the Coney Island Jockey Club are worth far less than the amount of the capital stock, which is $525,000. The gross receipts of the club for last year, as reported to the State Comptroller, were $854,421.20. Of what did these consist? It was said that the attendance on “big days” last year numbered from 40,000 to 50,000. Put it at 35,000, and the money taken in for admission, boxes and clubhouse seats and boxes and for “field” admissions would amount to about $80,000. Then there are the bookmakers. On more than one day last year there were 120 members of the Metropolitan Turf Association in the ring. They paid $57 each for the privilege of “laying the odds.” Back of them were a hundred layers who paid $37 each. There were fifty others who paid $27, and as many more who paid $17 each. Programs to the number of 40,000 at ten cents each make $400. Then there are the bar and restaurant privileges, the commissioners and many other means of income, so that the income of one such day could not be less than $100,000.

There were thirty days of racing at Sheepshead Bay last year. The attendance, according to the daily press, was “enormous,” “record-breaking,” “large” or “highly satisfactory.” The “highly satisfactory” days were the smallest of the season, which shows the difference between English as it is understood by “sporting” writers in the daily press and those who are able to distinguish the difference between fact and fancy. If the average daily attendance were not more than 12,500, it and the other sources of revenue would mean about $35,000 per day.

Thirty days’ racing at $35,000 per day $1,050,000 Expenses of all kinds at $10,000 per day 300,000 -------- Balance in favor of the club $750,000

The sum of $10,000 per day will cover all the expenses, including added money, at Sheepshead Bay. According to such calculation and taking the club’s figures of gross receipts as correct, the result would be like this:

Receipts for thirty days’ racing $854,421.20 Expenses for thirty days’ racing at $10,000 per day 300,000.00 ----------- Balance in favor of the club $554,421.20

These figures show that the profits of the Coney Island Jockey Club for _thirty days_ of racing are more than the full amount of its capital stock. Some years ago, when racing was conducted on a smaller scale, this stock paid 56 per cent. per annum. Unless a lot of money is packed away in a reserve fund, the stock should pay dollar for dollar now, and the state still gets the “penny in the dollar.”

Much of the income was contributed by the chief factors at a race-course—the men who own and race horses; and one of the most interesting features of a race meeting, to members of the Racing Trust, is the fact that the men who own the horses are racing for money contributed, in great part, by themselves. The money added by the racing associations is often less than the amounts furnished by owners of horses that have been entered for a race. Much stress is laid upon the fact that $2,601,160 was won in purses last year on the tracks of the metropolitan circuit and Bennings. This amount, large as it may seem, was so distributed that very few owners paid much more than expenses, while a far larger number lost much money. Four hundred and thirty-eight stables or owners were among the winners, and a glance at the following table will show that the losers were in a large majority.

OWNERS AND WINNINGS

Herman B. Duryea $200,043 James R. Keene 164,940 E. R. Thomas 151,210 Sydney Paget 133,441 Newton Bennington 104,210 John A. Drake 99,480 S. S. Brown 82,472 R. T. Wilson, Jr. 69,115 John E. Madden 55,830 Goughacres Stable 50,084 Thomas Hitchcock, Jr. 44,540 W. B. Jennings 34,605 M. L. Hayman 34,330 John Sanford 33,435 W. B. Leeds 32,320 L. V. Bell 31,520 J. W. Colt 23,130 Waldeck Stable 23,050 M. Corbett 22,445 J. L. McGinnis 21,400 Andrew Miller 20,155 Frank Farrell 19,980 W. C. Daly 18,495 “Mr. Cotton” 18,135 “Mr. Chamblet” 17,605 P. Lorillard 17,290 J. E. Widener 16,970 C. F. Fox 16,810 A. L. Aste 16,705 S. Deimel 16,605 J. McLaughlin 16,490 E. W. Jewett 16,165 August Belmont 15,745 Columbia Stable 15,317 W. Lakeland 15,220 Boston Stable 14,765 H. T. Griffin 14,555 F. R. Hitchcock 14,405 J. G. Greener 14,200 Albemarle Stable 12,895 T. L. Watt 12,755 E. E. Smathers 12,695 N. Dyment 11,900 U. Z. De Arman 11,080 Oneck Stable 10,600 John J. Ryan 10,515 W. M. Sheftel 10,515 W. L. Oliver 10,425 P. J. Dwyer 10,382 Joseph E. Seagram 9,305 Mrs. J. Blute 9,305 David Gideon (9 horses) 9,230 H. C. Schulz 8,910 W. F. Fanshawe 8,775 J. L. Holland 8,765 C. E. Rowe 8,475 F. R. Docter 8,440 J. W. Schorr 8,295 R. H. McCarter Potter 8,060 National Stable 7,805 J. C. Yeager 7,720 H. J. Morris 7,600 Fairview 7,405 T. D. Sullivan 7,335 Frederick Johnson 7,260 Chelsea Stable 7,090

In addition to the foregoing, 155 stables won between $1,000 and $7,000 each. Some of these stables had as many as a dozen starters who “figured in the money.” Stables or owners to the number of 217 won between $100 and $1,000 each. Of this number fifty-four were in the $100 class. The average winnings for the 438 stables were $5,938, which sum tells a doleful tale for a majority of them, as the expenses of one thoroughbred and its owner for a year cannot well be squeezed into $5,938, unless the horse’s diet is restricted to hay and the owner lives at a Mills hotel. Mr. Keene’s winnings were $164,940. That amount about paid his racing expenses for the year.

All of which, I think, goes to prove that the Racing Trust is more anxious to make and increase enormous profits than to improve the breed of horses. And everybody is aware that such enormous profits are made only by violation of the Constitution of the state, and that, while gambling in poolrooms and elsewhere has been made difficult and dangerous, no effort has been made by the authorities to interfere with it on the tracks of the Racing Trust.

_Dependence_

Not that there are not “other eyes In Spain” as bright as yours can be, But that no eyes in all the world Can ever seem as bright to me.

Not that there are not lips as sweet Kissed daily by each separate wind, But that no other lips to me Can seem so sweet, can be so kind.

Sweetheart, I own myself your slave Because you own yourself my thrall; I—with so little, dear, to give; You—who so gladly give me all.

REGINALD WRIGHT KAUFFMAN.

_What Buzz-Saw Morgan Thinks_

BY W. S. MORGAN

Paternalism is preferable to infernalism.

When the gentleman with the cloven hoof collects what is coming to him there won’t be many bag barons left.

The Beef Trust does business on a sliding scale; the price they pay slides down, and the price they sell at slides up.

A pauper lives off the public, and so do those who make their money through special privileges granted them by law.

As Bryan is losing prestige with the people he is becoming more popular with the plutocrats.

The United States Senate should be rechristened and called the Corporations’ Cuckoo’s nest.

The way to make the cuss-toady-ans of public interests more amenable to our will is to have ready an Imperative Mandate lariat.

Yes, the trusts are in the people’s pasture, and they got in over Republican and Democratic fences.

It is better that a whole lot of business shall be “hurted” than that the trusts should continue to rob the people and be a standing menace to free government.

The Governor of Kansas is right; building a state refinery is not Socialism; it is competition, just what the Populists stand for.

The trusts also have “big sticks.”

The Standard Oil Company has outlawed itself and ought to be “swatted” off the face of the earth.

The bandit bag barons are going to have some hard sledding from now on.

If the concentration of wealth means the destruction of the republic, then the people have a right to stop the concentration of wealth.

The fact that the trusts are now in control of the railroads is another reason why the Government should own them.

An economic principle that does not rest upon a moral basis should receive no support from honest men.

Every applicant for a special legalized privilege is an enemy to good government.

It is the men who are always hammering at the doors of legislation for special privileges that want “something for nothing.”

The greatest power in the world is that which controls the volume of money, and the Republicans are talking about turning that power over to a few private buccaneers.

When the very rich men are called by their right names there will not be such a scramble to get rich.

It is to be hoped that in this fight with the trusts and railroad corporations that “big stick” of Teddy’s will not prove to be a stuffed club.

If Uncle Sam wants to mix his credit with anybody’s let him mix it with that of the farmers. Their security is better than bonds.

More that half of the men in the United States Senate wear corporation collars.

If all the big thieves were sentenced to jail we should have to turn the little thieves out in order to make room for them.

I challenge anyone to point out a single instance in this country where the national bankers have made a recommendation in the interests of the people. It is always a jug-handled proposition in their favor.

One of the biggest pieces of foolishness in this old world of ours is for Uncle Sam to make free money for the bankers to loan, and then borrow that same money for his own use.

Unless there is some change made in the manner of selecting United States senators, that body of corporation attorneys would better be abolished.

So insignificant was the last Presidential candidate of the Democratic Party that a great many voters have already forgotten his name.

The country is now ready for the election of United States senators by the people instead of the corporations, but that body of august lawmakers will block every effort in that direction.

If there is no other way to prevent corporations from violating the law they should be denied its protection, just like other outlaws. A dose of that kind of medicine would soon bring them to their milk.

The decision of the North Sea Commission seems to be based upon the principle (if it has a principle) that a naval commander has a right to fire at anything that frightens him.

If the packers didn’t steal their immense fortunes from the people, whom did they steal them from?

A “reasonable rate,” as interpreted by the railroad companies, is all the honey except barely enough to keep the bees from starving to death.

There has already been a good deal of water squeezed out of Standard Oil stock; now, if some process can be brought forward that will squeeze the water out of the oil the company sells, it will be better yet.

The great trusts have shown that they have no regard for “vested rights.” They have “frozen out” the smaller concerns without mercy. Why, then, should they object to a little of the “freezing” process, if the Government or states decide to go into the oil business on their own account?

If the Socialists insist on turning the world over at one flip, like turning a pancake, before they can start the show, they are following a mighty cold trail. If they are willing to go by the usual road of evolution there is no reason why they and the Populists should not work together, for awhile at least.

The man who is wholly controlled by sentiment is not fit to vote. Voting is a business proposition and demands both intelligence and good judgment.

It seems to be the policy of lawmakers in this country to grant special privileges to the rich and powerful, and to permit them to impose upon the weak, and this condition will remain just so long as men will submit to being robbed.

The men who prate most about “vested rights” and “law and order” are the ones who violate them most.

When the Government thought the express companies were charging the people too much for the transmission of money it went into the money-order business itself. What was the result? Why, the express companies had to come to the rate established by the Government or get none of the business. It was purely a matter of business, and that’s the way to do it.

It was the “battle-scared” bag barons that discredited government paper money during the Civil War between the states. Yet it is from these men that we hear most about “national honor” and “public credit.” They are the same class of men of whom honest old Abe Lincoln said: “They ought to be hanged”; and the country would have fared better ever since if they had been.

Nearly every civilized nation in the world owns all or a part of its system of railroad and telegraph lines, and they have no disposition to turn them over to private corporations. The United States alone permits a few wealthy buccaneers to levy taxes on the people which no government would dare do. An increase of three cents per bushel on corn alone means a tax of fifty millions of dollars to the men who produce that cereal.

Until recently the national bankers paid the Government one per cent. on the money the Government loaned them. Then they claimed that it was too much to pay for the use of the money and the credit of the Government, and Congress reduced the rate to one-half of one per cent. But the banker has no conscientious scruples about loaning this money to the people at eight and ten per cent.

The railroad companies admit that they violate the law by granting rebates, but set up the claim that if they did not do it they would lose their share of the traffic. It is a very singular plea. It is not half as just as the one that a man steals because he is hungry, or because his wife and children are suffering for the necessaries of life. “We violate the law because somebody else does,” say the railroad companies. Suppose that every criminal would set up the same excuse for the commission of crime. And ordinary criminals have a better right to make that plea in palliation for their crime than the trusts and corporations have. If, as they admit, the railroad managers are so dishonest that one must violate the law because another does, if there is no way to restrain them except to turn the whole matter over to them, and permit them to pool their earnings so that one thief can watch the other thieves, it is about time to abolish the whole system of private ownership and for the Government to take charge of the lines of transportation. The railroad companies make out the worst kind of a case against themselves. They admit that there are enough law-breakers among them to demoralize the whole system.

The public has heard a good deal about legislation that would discourage capital from being invested in the state enacting the legislation. It has been said that the passage of laws calculated to regulate the business of large corporations would have the effect of driving them away. Kansas just now is giving us an object-lesson along this line. The laws recently passed by the Legislature in that state are perhaps the most drastic in their nature ever passed by any state for the control and regulation of corporations, yet the prospect is that more capital will go to that state than ever before. Although the state is now engaged in building an oil refinery, there are several other independent refineries projected, with a good prospect for more to come. It is evident that capital has not as much to fear from the people, when it is legitimately invested and operated, as it has from the arrogant aggressions of such enormous concerns as the Standard Oil Company that will brook no competition. If capital will be satisfied with a fair profit it has nothing to fear from the people, while, on the other hand, independent concerns that operate legitimately in any line of business have much to fear from the great trusts that have been built up through favors granted them by railroads and municipalities.

_Flying the Kite_

HUDSON—Do you think they will be able to get along on $10,000 a year?

BUDSON—They ought to. With that much money they should manage to run in debt for another ten thousand.

* * * * *

The rich man may defy the laws of the land and keep out of prison, but when he gets dyspepsia from eating things out of season he realizes that he can’t defy the laws of nature.

_The Heritage of Maxwell Fair_

BY VINCENT HARPER _Author of “A Mortgage on the Brain”_

SYNOPSIS OF PREVIOUS CHAPTERS

Maxwell Fair, an Englishman who has amassed a colossal fortune on ’Change, inherits from his ancestors a remarkable tendency to devote his life to some object, generally a worthy, if peculiar one, which is extravagantly chivalrous. The story opens with Fair and Mrs. Fair standing over the body of a man who has just been shot in their house—a foreigner, who had claimed to be an old friend of Mrs. Fair. Fair sends her to her room, saying: “Leave everything to me.” He hides the body in a chest, and decides to close the house “for a trip on the Continent.” Fair tells the governess, Kate Mettleby, that he loves her; that there is no dishonor in his love, in spite of Mrs. Fair’s existence, and that, until an hour ago, he thought he could marry her—could “break the self-imposed conditions of his weird life-purpose.” They are interrupted before Kate, who really loves him, is made to understand. While the Fairs are entertaining a few old friends at dinner, Kate, not knowing that it contains Mrs. Fair’s blood-stained dress, is about to hide a parcel in the chest when she is startled by the entrance of Samuel Ferret, a detective from Scotland Yard. He tells her that he, with other detectives, is shadowing the foreign gentleman who came to the Fair house that day and has not yet left it. He persuades Kate to promise that she will follow the suspect when he leaves the house and then report at Scotland Yard. As soon as Ferret is gone she lifts the lid off the chest, drops the package into it, and, with a shriek, falls fainting to the floor. Mr. and Mrs. Fair run to her aid. On being revived Kate goes to Scotland Yard, where, in her anxiety to shield Maxwell Fair from suspicion, she inadvertently leads the detectives to think that a crime has been committed at the Fair house. The two detectives are piecing together the real facts from the clues she has given, when Ferret is summoned to the telephone by his associate Wilson, whom he had left on guard in the home of the Fairs.

“Hello, Wilson!” He began speaking to his distant lieutenant. “Yes—yes. No? By George! Yes, yes. Good, good! With you in ten minutes.”

He hung up the receiver and to Sharpe’s impatient gesture replied: “Wilson says the quarry is up. Mendes the Cuban has just left the house, with Thorpe following to see where he goes. And now there’s the very devil to pay. Wilson is hot on the trail. So I’m off.”

“If anything goes wrong, call me up,” said Sharpe, keenly enjoying the play of the big fish that he would have safely landed by a day or two.

“Right you are! Ta, ta!”

Ferret lost no time in reaching the Fair mansion. The guests were still at dinner and he could see no trace of excitement from without. Wilson reported in detail the sudden appearance of the Cuban, his hurried flight up the street with Thorpe at his heels—and all quiet inside.

“Who the devil fired that shot, and at whom was it fired, and what did pretty Kate mean by her stammering protests that no crime had been done? Was the saucy little minx deeper after all than they thought?” asked Ferret of himself. He must have a good look at that library—that was the key to the thickening mystery. So he stole up the stairs, but before he could investigate the fatal library he heard the family coming up from dinner and fled to the attic, passing Kate’s door, which stood ajar, and through which he saw her on her knees with her face buried on the bed.