Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1882-09-30
the Lutte Rock s,rinaIe.


The Arkansas State Gzaette.has the follow
ing account OF the way they treat The endow-
ment swindles in Little Rock. II Is what
should be done with the great msjority OF
such associations here:
The conviction OF the Pawnee Self Endow-
ment Association, in the Police Court, az
gift enterprise swindle and flake" OF the
most bareiaced and hesrtless character,
brought the combinations of juvenile Col.
Sellers, the syndicates with only cheek aud
assum ption for capital, and the widow, the
sewing girl, the youth and the overgrown
sinpletop. the s'unreasoning fool" as their
world to speculate in. Yes, they caught
many. also, who knew all all about 1.-THE lit
tie game that was played" and Tor their
losses one could but feel glad Yesterday
the Sslf-Mutuals, the Daily Marriage and
all others, the illegitimate descendants OF the
"Pawnee" scalper, came to the conclusion 10
surrender 10 police regulations and pay their
S25 per week, as other gaming establish
ments have TO do. Nine or ten, IT Is stated,
of the score or more that exist here paid
the money, and the others are getting
ready 10 de so. But they should not be per-
mitted even tn at privilege. They should be
shut up peremptorily and suddenly. Inc
city cannot afford to sanction self-endow-
ments aud daily marriages OF that deserip-
ton. The law should protect selfish fools
and trusting simpletoDs
The officers of the several associations
were dull indeed yesterday, and Stonewall
Jackson and chief aud that aesthetic cuss
looked as blue as the Pawnee scalper himself.
The Pawnee, it is said, received seven APP
plications for policies from the country yes
terday Oh, the rural dupes.
Mr.. Borg, who had four certificates OF the
Pawnee, worth on its roseate plan and reck-
less promises over 500, sold yesterday 1.-THE
entire LOTT for 81.
Mr.. Terry, in his eloquent and forcible
speech before the Police Court, proved by
figures the enormity of the ewindle which is
the foundation of these mushroom, wildcat
enterprises. A witness then testified that
out of every Sl5 given to them SIS went as
agents fees, Sc were gobbled up as expenses,
and 81 put away Tor a sinking fund. How,
then, can any one get 50 per day out OF that
81? Simply and necessarily by robbiDg
some one else. Why, TO pay every one back
but merely the SI5 he put in, there would
have TO be assessed upon every member Sll,
for all but 81 of the SIS has been seized as
fees and expenses. This being so plain,
why should the existence of these associa-
tione be tolerated for an hour?
Concerning these swindles the Gdzette has
the following editorial comments:
1t does not require argument to prove lack
OF merit in sn institution conducted on the
circular issued in this city few days ago by
the authorized managers of the so-called
GMuiual Self Endowment Association" held
that that "the Gazette does net understand
our associations aud never will" also, that
newspaper men do not know every thing,
and one Thing some of them never will be
able to get through them is mutual insur-
ance.n 1t must be confessed that the quoted
sentences contain truth in solid chunks.
Newspaper men "don't know everything"
and one thing they "don't know" is how an
association can return to each OF It's MEM
bers several hundred per cent. more than be
paws in. They know how ii can pay small
proportion of them, but don't know" how
The great majority can avoid being badly
left.
To illustrate: A amutual self-endowmeut
association so-called, requires each mem
Der to paw only SIS. Ii promises that few
DAYS thereafter he will begin to receive
premiums at the rate of S. per day, or $50
per week of six days. 1t is intim ated that an
assessment will be asked occasionally, but
the member is assured that his premiums
will be large in the aggregate. As much as
thirty three per cent. is paid to agents who
secure members. Expenses, profits 10 man
spsrs. etc. can hardly fall below thirty-ihree
per cent. more. This will leave thirty-three
per cent. of the sum total paid by each MEM
Der with which 10 pay each member $50 per
week out of an original and fiual assessment
LEES an occasional s. assessment-of Sl5-
To accomplish this, each new member
nets only s. TO the association, the net pro-
ceeds of six memberships are required 10 pay
the premium on one membership.
While six persons can be found ready to
furnish SIS each with which to pay all the
expenses, and an additional IS 10 each mem
Der paying $5 per day, an association OF this
kind will doubtless flourish. But with the
certainty that on this basis 6ve-sixths OF The
members must lose the original investment,
il may be doubted if money will continue 10
flow into the association's treasury. The
sole question is: Who will prove the lucky
one-sixth and who the unlucky fye-sixths?
1t is unnecessary to discuss the question of
assessments to cover deficits; for as every
member knows his association TO be con
Quoted in violation of all business principles
and of common sense, he simply takes the
chances. and considers assessment day the
proper time for his membership 10 lapse.
He recognizes that call for assessment
means an exhaustion of funds, and that the
six. to.oue game has virtually ended.
The Gas<tte does not discuss Institutions of
his kind as swindles. Swindles hope to sue