The Redwood gazette. [volume] (Redwood Falls, Minn.) 1873-1940, 1878-08-29

And though you zee her here NO more.
lis mee. it ahOuid b. 90.
Let each his house in order set,
That he may leave without regret
Whenever called to 20.
--Xrs. Danisl ormsby aged siohfv.dre ysars) in
Springfield tVass.) Republican.
ARE THERE NO HONEST MEN!
One of the daily papers, discussing
the subject of defalcations, lays down
these two propositions:
There is no man who will ultimate
IL resist the temptation to use funds
which are absolutely in his control for
long time; and in using them he does
so with the most honorable intentions,
trusting to secrecy until he shall have
paid back every cent"
Both Of these statements are Obiec-
tionable, because they are not founded
i'll truth. 1t would be in the highest
degree discreditable to the human race,
if the first proposition were true, and
exceedingly dangerous to admit the JUS
tice of the second. Let us look ut them
separately:
l. There Is no man who will ulti-
mately resist the temptation to use
funds which are absolutely in his con-
troll for long time" Is that so?
Then there are no honest men living;
then We may not put confidence in any
body; then character is no basis for
trust, and defalcation or robbery is
but question of time. Give any man
time and opportunity and he will prove
himself to be 4 villain. Now we do
not take SO sad a view of society as this.
We bear in mind that in proportion to
the vast number of trusted men, the
breaches of trust are very few. In such
a community rs New York. Boston or
Philadelphia, the number of men hav-
ing absolute control of large trusts, as
executors, agents, guardians, trustees
Of estates and minors, is to be counted
by tens and hundreds of thousands.
Scarcely man of position and charac-
ter but ID in some way made the
trustee of money which he is to ham
die and guard for others. Some of
these men are Treasurers of great in
situations, with large sums lying in
their hands, subject to their individual
direction, and at any time they could
hypothecate securities, raise money,
and on It depart out of the city, or
speculate in stocks. This is the tempta-
ton which overcomes weak and wicked
men. But to say that "no man will
resist this temptation is to ignore the
fact that the immense majority of men
do resist; that the defaulters are only
as one in q thousand, miserable excep-
tons to the general rule, which is hon
esty, not robbery. The facts are bad
enough, without making them worse
by exaggeration. We would not in
crease general distrust by impeaching
the many who are entitled to the more
confidence because others forfeit char
acter and drown themselves in the per-
dition of dishonest men. Good men
would shrink from holding trusts, If it
were held as fact that all men will
betray their trusts with plenty of time
aud opportunity.
2. Bat the second statement is even
more dangerous than the first. The
one exciteS distrust, the second stimu-
lates to crime. The writer says: lin
using them Crust funds) he does SO
with the most honorable intentions,
trusting to secrecy until he shall have
paid back every cent" The point
we make is that the word honorable in
such a connection is unfortunate and in
furious to good morals. The i,stention
is in tho highest degree dishonorable
which encourages q trustee to peril the
money of another for his own advan-
tage. The intention to restore is the
salve to his conscience, or rather the
mask that he wears while he robs his
innocent, unsuspecting and helpless
victims. Honorable intentions, indeed!
A man being entrusted with the money
of another, says to himself: 81 will
take this money and go upon the
street with it and operate till have
doubled it; then will put it back where
it now Is, and the trust will be good
as before. l will be SO much richer,
and nobody will know how it was done. :"
Is. that honest? The trust was safe as
it stood. Or it was where the law and
his judgment directed him to place it.
But he resolved to put it in peril for the
sake of making himself rich. His in
tentiOn to put the money back was part
of the scheme which he formed for his
own advantage at the hazard of the
trust. The resolution was dishonest
The intention was no palliation, but
was cloak for the crime, and, there.
fore, was in no sense honorable. The
moment that he decided to violate his
obligation as q trustee the man was
lost. Having no better right to take
that money for his own use than he
would have had if it were in the keep
ing of another, be was a thief at heart
as soon as he determined on its appro-
priation.
We are the more explicit ON this
point because it is just here that men
deceive themselves, and are deceived
by such reasoning as we have cited.
They vainly imagine that restoration
atoDes for the appropriation of what
was not their own; as if it were a suffi
cient excuse for highway robbery thai
the robber intended to restore, and
actually did restore, at some future
time, the purse he took. The Trustet
who misappropriates the funds in hi!
hands is as much worse than thief
as a thief is meaner than . robber; tn,
meanness being greater as the risk o
detection is diminished.
These are times when this subiec
ought to be fully understood. It is wei
to set before the best of men the dan
gers of temptation when facilities ar,
40 great, and the standard of moralit,
is SO fearfully low. So many have bee1
the breaches of trust on the part q
Treasurers and Directors and Presidents
as we'll as of private trustees, that me,
have come to look upon these offense
with a leniency that is exceedingly un
favorable to public virtue. 1t IS nov
very hard to make q s'breach of trust
acrime punishable with imprisonment
The honorable intention" to restur
palliates the sin and wipes out tn
shame in the eyes of a money-gettin,
generation. But it is not 50 in the eye
of Him who seeth in secret. It ough
not to be SO in the eye of the law, or Q
any good man.-M 7. Obsevver.