The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1892-12-11

JAY GOULD left his great estate to his
children, as might reasonably havo been
expected OF him. When men accumulate
money much or little, It is natural that
they should hand 1t down to their children,
n they have them. and generally the pub
lie sentiment commcnus them for go doing.
The feeling that II man should rghtfully
look first after his own household prevails
among the people.
When the state is ns vast as Mr. GoULD's.
however, some newspapers utter cXclnma-
tions of surprise aud Of protest II some OF
It is not bcqucaihnd for public purposes or
for organized charities. They seem to pro-
coed on the assumption that the man Is
bound To take away from his children money
which he himself would not give up during
his life. In other words. they would re-
quiro him TO force his children to make
bonefactions which he himself had not made.
II n moral obligation to give AWAY his
money thus rests on man. 1t rests on him
personally and during his own life. He
does not discharge it by keeping the money
while he lives and compelling his children
to give it away for him after his death. If
his money or any part OF 1t belongs to the
public Of right. it belongs to them during
tho life of the man. not merely at his death.
He is responsible for tho stewardship and
is accountable for Its performance. and he
cannot transfer to others the obligation.
Really, it cannot he called noble gener-
osity. high altrulsm. for man to give
away his money only after he Is dead and
he has no more use FOR it. He should be his
own n!nioner during his own life. II the
methods by which he obtained his fortune
were Gu. pablo in his own estimation and he
wishes to make atonoment for them In
departing from this life. he can do 1t only
BY returning to the individuals the money
which he took from them wrongfully. He
does not Written his offence by giving 1t to
somebody else. lit belongs rightfully to
others besides himself. it belongs to those
from whom he got 1t by unjust means.
1t was made evident during Mr.. GoULD's
life that no had no such conscientious scru-
Piles as to the means by which he sccumu-
lated his great estate. Death did not come
to him unexpectedly. For years past he
must have been forewarned that his life
was approaching Its end. The conscious
ness that his time on earth was likely to be
short probably induced him to pay special
attention to his religious obligations as he
understood them. He became q diligent
attendant upon Presbyterian church. and
he gave his open adherence to Its severe
doctrines Of future accountability for his
conduct in this life. He was not an intidel
He was an orthodox believer. He must
have died thinking that his fortune was
rightfully bis own. and had been obtained
by means consistent with the obligations Of
religion. He could not have felt that he
was under the moral compulsion Of making
restitution to anybody.
In leaving his fortune to his children he
put upon each OF them the burden Of his
own moral responsibility to use his money.
He made each Of them bis own almoner.
with power to use his own income in his
own way. IA he himself had done and in
sisted on doing. That Is all.
The public criticism as to the disposition
OF Mr.. GouLD's vast income must be trans
ferred to his children. II any criticism Is
proper. They are tho accountable stew
ards. lie himself has passed to his ac-
count and is beyond tho power OF criticism
to affect his acts or their consequences.