Smyrna times. [volume] (Smyrna, Del.) 1854-1987, 1880-01-21

failed. At first it was supposed that his
affairs where only temporarily embar-
raised, and that all creditors would be
paid in full Soon it began to be whis-
pered that there were irregularities in
his affairs, and while these rumors were
circulating the Grocers' Bank suddenly
suspended payment and applied for the
appointment of receiver. The only ex-
PLANTATION given was that the Bank held
large amount Of Mr.. Haigh's paper, and
was obliged to suspend in justice to all,
to avoid a ''run" Then it was rumored
that this paper was not good, and Limits
were let drop that some of it was forged.
Then the other banks were said to hold
similar forged paper of Mr.. Haigh's
These rumors were at first denied by bank
officials, some of whom persisted in de-
NAL until this course was made useless by
the arrest and indictment for forgery of
Mr. Haigh, on the testimony of the re-
ceiver and cashier of the Grocers Bank.
1t now turns out that Mr.. HaiGh was
forger on large scale. This is not so
very unusual a circumstance strange
ness consists in the way in which bust
ness men treated this case.
In one bank Mr. Haigh opened an ac-
count and deposited some $4,000 of
forged paper, which was discounted and
passed to his credit. Before he had
drawn any money the forgeries were dis
coved and he was sent for. After DENY
ing the fact, he at length confessed it,
and the paper was at once charged back
to him and the account closed. The
bank had lost nothing, and took no steps
whatever against him, nor does it appear
! that any warming was sent to other banks
where Mr.. Haigh was known to have
accounts. This is curious morality for
the average business man. When the
exposure came, no bank that held the
forged paper proceeded against Mr..
Haigh. The receiver of the Grocers'
Bank acted on his own responsibility in
appearing before the Grand Jury, and for
so doing he was censured by some OF the
Banks officers, on the ground that if Mr..
Haigh were left to assist his assignee
in winding up his affairs, he would be
able to make good the forged paper, and
so the Bank would lose nothing. Other
banks give the same reason for not pro-
ceeding against Mr.. Haigh they expect
the bad paper to be made good from the
assets of his business. Among certain
business men in New York, therefore, il
seems that forgery is not crime to be
punished unless somebody loses money by
it when nothing is lost it is merely az
'.irregularity" This is surely a very
high morality, and rests on very un
selfish desire for the public good
But this is not the whole of the case
by any means. 1t is now asserted, by 81
good an authority as the Hon. Abraim S
Hewitt, that Mr. Haigh was some year
ago detected in some crime, Mr.. Hewitt
will not say what, by the firm Of Cooper
Hewitt & Co. He was let off. on promis
of amendment, and Mr.. Hewitt defend
, his action in that case. This is more ex
allied morality-a business man of NOR
: than the average high standing approving
the compromising of felony which CAV
, an unrepentant criminal second chanc
, to prey on society Still further, it
/ said that Mr. Haigh, who was the cor
tractor for the wire in the Brooklyn Bridg
: cables, was detected in attempting t
I deliver defective wire. and that he az
f tually succeeded in getting a considerabl
!. quantity of it used in the cables. Yc
y the fact was not made known, or the ma
i punished. If the fact is as stated, tn
q moral baseness Of the man who could fC
few thousand dollars of gain delibe
ately risk possible disaster to whic
= that of the Tay would be nothing
!. comparison, is only greater than that I
the authorities who failed to punish sue
; villainy.
e. 1t has been urged, with great fore
" against the Brooklyn Presbytery, that i
a. members were wrong in trying to "hus
70 up" the charges of falsehood and dece
made against Mr.. Talmage, and to pate
Is up peace that was no peace. because
le rested on no moral grounds. But this
of Just what business men do in cases
is vastly greater crimes than any charg'
10 against the Brooklyn preacher. Wh'
- sneering critics point to the Talmage ca
G and say, "there's your ministerial NOR;
&c ity," is it not fair retOrt to point to t
es Haigh case and say, there's your ma
no ofthe-world morality?