The Express.
London, England, 1868-08-27 00:00:00

THE ONE RIGHTEOUS MAN.

Ix the kingdom of the blind the one-eyed is
king. According to this principle of selection, a
recent letter addressed to the Times by Mr. R.
STUART LANE has been welcomed by public
credulity with grateful surprise as quite a master-
piece of indignant financial virtue. Let us
see what sort of sacrifice it is that
Mr. R. STUART LANE proposes to offer
on the altar of his self-esteem. It ap-
pears that he is, or was, a director of the Credit
Foncier of England, whose brilliant operations at
home and abroad have resulted in the ruin of
thousands of families. Mr. R. STUART LANE avers
that, " to the best of his belief," the Directors of
that Company " never received in any shape
" any remuneration beyond that to which they
were justly entitled, and that such amount of
" remuneration was only arrived at after the
" most capful scrutiny by persons we believe
" thoroughly trustworthy and independent." It
requires no veryprofound acquaintancewith the rules
of logic to detect in this paragraph as many gross
fallacies as six lines can contain. Mr. R. STUART
LANE begs every question that can possibly concern
the shareholders, and seems utterly ignorant or
unconscious of the case he is required to prove.
To the best of his belief it may have been per-
fectly right and proper for the directors of the
Credit Foncier, under the able and appropriate
administration of Mr. ALBERT GRANT, to enrich
themselves by commissions offered and accepted
for floating fancy companies at home and abroad,
which were destined to absorb like a sponge the
savings of a multitude of innocent and obscure in-
vestors. Mr. R. STUART LANE is, of course, at liberty
to consider that the Directors were justly entitled to
this sort and amount of remuneration for bringing
innumerable people, who trusted in them, to
poverty. Nor is it improbable that, holding such
views of the duty of directors acting in the capacity
of trustees for their shareholders, Mr. R.
STUART LANE and his co-directors should
believe in the thorough trustworthiness and
independence of the persons who, " after the most
" careful scrutiny," approved and sanctioned this
distribution of profits. It would be a miserable
satisfaction to the shareholders of the Credit
Foncier of England to learn the names of
these " persons" on whose careful scrutiny the
Directors relied, and who acted as the keepers
of the directorial conscience, before they venture
to take heart of grace from Mr. R. STUART
LANE'S chivalrous declaration that " should any
" errors have been, even unintentionally, made in
" such calculations by unfair valuations of the
" assets—(what assets ?)—or otherwise," he is
", perfectly ready and most anxious to make good
" any overpayment to the fullest extent."
_ _

Mi. B. SWART La acknowledges the receipt
of the small trifle of 4,1261. hie. 9d. (the 9d.
is charming ! ) as " Directors' commission."
Commission on what ? This insignificant honora-
rium of 4,1261. 15e. 9d. does not represent salary,
which might be a perfectly intelligible and legiti-
mate form of " remuneration." What then does it
represent ? It represents " commission" for ruining
the shareholders—a transaction which bears an
ugly resemblance to scuttling. After this, need
we say any more about this handsome offer by
Mr. STUART LANE than that we devoutly wish
the poor shareholders of the Credit Foncier of
England may get it—whatever or wherever " it "
may be.