The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1897-01-31


from his creditors for an amount of about
one half OF what he did get and when he
failed would be required to make a general
assignment, so that 80 la per cent was
paid get releases and be free from debt
again and in good standing in the com
meroial world.
As It is, he did wrong when he held
out his notes and the balance OF his life
acted a dishonest part TO conceal his prop
crty from his creditors and thereby defeat
the payment of honest debts. Possibly the
bank held some paper securities, but pre-
ferring TO accept the benefits under the
deed OF trust, delivers the papers back TO
Smith, and thereby assists him in the fraud
I have In mind one Instance where man
took out OF his business $1,000 and built a.
fine three-story business house. used part
for his store and the balance MS a hotel
The building cost 1900: the $4,000 was Sc
cured by mechanics lien notes due one.
two and three years. The notes found their
way into a local bank. The owner OF the
fine building and the bank officials got
their heads together. and as a result OF the
conference Il deed of trust was made and
the attorneys fee of $500 and the $4,000 me-
chanic's lien undue notes were preferred,
The merchandise paid these two debts, the
lien notes were delivered up cancelled, and
as a result the sl3 900 exempt property was
free from the lien and the merchant tells
MS OiUNT ETtuliUH 10 wall uiltli A' '"Ai
make some money and he will pay them.
Now, gentlemen of the committee, | ask
you is a system that permits all this busi-
ness honest? is II right? Is II calculated
to elevate our business classes to n higher
plane OF business and moral ethics. or does
II not rather tend to breed dishonesty, ras-
cality and encourage a spirit of differing
that only acknowledges those things to be
honest and right which the law makes II
unsafe TO have otherwise In other words
does not these opportunities rather encour-
age q man to be honest only because IL IS
dangerous to be dishonest and TO pay only
those debts which he has TO. and not be-
cause IL Is his duty to pay them? | do not
think as a general principle OF ethics that
any law which permits a debtor to withhold
from his creditors any property save ana
except legal exemptions and say to such
creditors Take half what | owe or Moth
ing" is right, Better far 10 depribe the
debtor Of what TO him is a privilege the
exercise OF which secures none OF the lib
critics upon which our institutions are
founded than to encourage policy the ten
dency OF which is essentially progenitive of
a business course not at all In harmony
with our idea Of equal and exact justice.
Chief Justice Willie in his opinion in See
ligson a. Co. VS.. Brown & Browne, I'll Texas,
holding that a purchaser from an insolyent,
paying the consideration In money or nego-
table notes, must see that such consld-
Grafton is applied to the payment OF honest
debts, and that to deliver such oonsidera-
ton into the hands of the seller. relying
on his promise tn make the proper appli-
cation OF the money so received, places the
power TO dictate terms 10 his creditors In
the hands OF the seller and encourages a
policy essentially wrong and unjust. This
most wise and eminently correct principle
has by q decision In saith Texas. been viz
tually overruled, and 1t is so now railing
debtor can sell out TO his ncighoor WHO
knows all about his Insolvency by merely
accepting the sellers promise TO pay the
proceeds on his first debts. put the money
in his pocket and dictate his own terms to
his creditors I merely call your attention
to these conditions to remind you OF the
extent to which a man inclined TO be dis
honest can go. II sounds all right to say a
man ought 10 have the privilege OF paying
any one 81 his creditors he pleases, making
the others wait. but when you remember
that where two men are given this privl-
lege which is as have stated. not funda-
mental and doee not deprive him OF any
substantial right. the third man. under any
possible statutory enactment ID hnofnen
an opportunty to wrong his neighbor' Inc
force and logic OF the theory Is DESTROYED
| and the reasons therefor fail II sounds
! all right to me to say that ought to be
/ permitted TO wear as few and as abbre-
| waited garments as my taste and comfor'
would dictate. but my appearance might o'
| offensive to my neighpbor. so the law step'
( in and bids me be decent as weis as com
| Portable.
Two years ago It was usually the CASE
! with us in North Texas that when ner'
( chant nj some near by town made deet
Of trust he managed to have enough to pa,
his home bank and relatives and leave
/ little something for our Fort Worth ant
/, Dallas jobbers. Put lately many of then
have gotten the thing down so fine that tn
Dallas and Fort Worth dealers get only al
honorary mention with none OF the sub
! stance.
Now there Is another wrong growing on
~ present conditions. These cases are no
so frequent, but I have seen many In M
oxnorienoe. a merchant heavily IN deb
10 his bpnk and his relatives gets on III
train and goes 10 ST Louis or New York
IIe carries with him a strong letter fror
his bank end goes in ~ lniervinw the creii
/ man; tells the New Yorker about his fin
j prosnects IN Texas. how he has formerl
i bought his goods In the Teyas market. hi
Its increasing volume made larger marke