Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1885-01-12
0be fanfastcr 1ntellieeiltrr,
-
LANCASTER, JANUARY Il, 1855.
Grant and Vanderbilt.

very creditable to all the parties concerned.
Mr.. Vanderbilt acted in the liberal way in
which only man of his vast wealth could
have afforded to act 1t was Il princely
way, as the Grants said. The wealth OF
Vanderbilt imposes upon him responsi-
bilities quite commensurate with the dls-
tinction it gives him among his fellows.
His stewardship of it is freely criticised,an
he is in fact only the custodian OF 1t, VINO
is held responsible for its lse and abuse
Just MS fully as though it was the money
Of the public who criticise and applaud or
condemn. Mr.. Vanderbilt may theoreti-
cally do what he pleases with his cash, but
practically he has to do what pleases the
public, because he wants the public's apro-
val. He did what he pleased when he gave
Grant the check for a hundred and fifty
thousand dollars on that Sunday morning.
It pleased him to do il because General
Grant asked him to. He gave it without
any questions. General Grant says he re-
CARDS this as mark of unusual friend
ship. It would be usually SO regarded.
A man who gives another one hundred
and fifty thousand dollars on demand,
without question or value received, may
fairly be considered friend in need and
deed. But General Grants position as a
suppliant to Vanderbilt for this favor was
out of the common run. Grant had been
president and general, and probably held
the position of first man in the country.
The man from whom he asked the favor
hold ,Iu oc bp ,.inhoat n thn
country.
The richest man may well have felt a sat-
isfaction in putting the first man under OBJ
legations to him. So that when he pleased
himself and paid for it, he got some value
for it, even though he lost his money.
This he lost because public opinion de-
manded 1t. A loan from the richest man
IN the country to ex-President and Cen
eral Grant was practically uncollectable :
and Mr.. Vanderbilt in offering to release
the general was but gracefully making a
virtue of necessity.
The general and his wife in declining to
be released have done what entirely belitted
the nation. If they had been less conspicu-
ouspeople they might verywellh accepted
Mr.. Vanderbilt's generosity as their credi-
tor If they believed it would please him To
have them accept it. There is no
shadow Of impropriety in accepting a
gift kindly offered which the donor can
well afford to make and for which he asks
no consideration save the gratitude of the
receiver. There is great deal of nonsense
talked about the ignominy of lying under
an obligation to another. 1t all depends
upon the circumstances. People who
are not under obligations to Others
are not found on earth Abso-
Lutte independence is impossible 10 every
one, and the most Independent person need
not refuse from another what he wants
and what the other wants to give him
without expecting any manner Of return.
That gift Of Vanderbilt S to the Grants
looks like one of just this kind, hut yet
it. They do not need il with their
$685. GOO trust fund +; and if they took ii the
creditors Of Grant x Ward would be likely
to look upon it as equitably theirs. General
Grant was foolish enough to go into part
nership with stranger and to permit him
to use his name for all it was worth with
outscrutiny or supervision. The creditors
of Grant 4 Ward became such largely
through their reliance on the honor and
sagacity of General Grant. 1t failed them
utterly, and his firm made the most
wretched and dishonorable failure of the
century.
1t is well that General and Mrs. Grant
should abstain from gifts which their
creditors may look on with longing, but
cannot share