The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-10-26
"GIvE BACK THE MONEY"
A Significant and Hopeful Declaration, If the
Necessary Proofs Are To Be Had.

A Significant and Hopeful Declaration, If the
Necessary Proofs Are To BE Had.
New York Star.
The firm of Grant e. Ward was not ruined by
any loss of money. Its commercial operations
were limited. Its losses in stocks or other in
vestments were small Its methods were simple
enough. By the promise of large profits it in
duced capitalists to deposit with or lend to the
firm money. The funds thus obtained were used
IN part to pay lenders and depositors enormous
sums, which were given as dividends or interest
Some of these depositors were doubtless limo
cent of wrong. Others were confederates in the
crime. All those who have these moneys should
return them to the receiver of Grant & Ward.
The innocent will be glad to have an opportunity
to make restitution. The guilty must return
the money.
If restitution is made. the receiver of Grant &
Ward will pay a large dividend to the creditors
of that firm. The Marine National Bank is one
OF those creditors, and if it shall regain any con-
siderable part of its losses on account of Grant
q Ward the depositors and other creditors of the
bank will be paid a great part of their debts.
Some Of those who were gamers through Grant
81 Ward are known. All will be known. And
presently the innocent, if they hold back. will in
the public judgment be COMPOUNDED with the
guilty. No man can retain these unlawful
gains; for the arm of the law is long enough to
reach the most distant, and strong enough to
overcome the most powerful.
1t is strange that restitution should not have
been made before. 1t is strange that honorable
men have not beer quick and eager to give back
these unholy moneys. They are indeed unholy
moneys; they are stained not alone with guilt,
they are red withia hero's blood. Why, then, have
they not been returned before2 Some one got
the money which the deluded Grant borrowed
from Mr.. Vanderbilt. It seems as if Warner got
it. If he did not some one else did! Why was
not this money sent back9 If the receiver was
innocent when it came into his hands, he soon
after knew from whom the money came, how it
was obtained, and what ruin it wrought. Why
did he not send it back to the stricken and heart
broken soldier. over whom shame was winning
a victory which embattled thousands could not
win2
What misery, what long nights and days of
pain and remorse might have been saved had
that money only been sent back to him. Did the
receivers Of it have no mercy2 The heros life
cannot now be saved. Restitution will not make
his slumber easier, nor will the wrong vex him
further. 1t is for their own sakes that we ask
those who have it to give back the money.
In an interview on Saturday, Mr.. Dorsheimer
said: Il mean every word in that article. 1
have the names, and shall continue to let the
guilty know that | have possession of them. If
they do not make restitution to the Grant
family / will expose them. | will compel them
to give back their wicked gains by process of
law. l have not compared my list of names
with those on the Grant monument fund com
mittee, but / believe that there are members of
that association who were engaged in the wrong,
and are now in the possession of the spoils."