People's party paper. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1891-1898, 1897-07-09

man who has been misrepresented, and
we are not ashamed to defend John
Law. The Telegraph can say nothing
against him save that he gambled.
In those days everybody gambled.
The Kings gambled the Queens gam
bled: the mobiles gambled: the priests
gambled: the commons gambled. There
are we'll authenticated instances in
which the mourners played cards on
the coffin of the deceased on the way
to the cemetery.
Louis XIV, the Grand Monarch, who
was reigning when Law first appeared
at the Court of France; not only gam
bled himself, but insisted upon it among
his courtiers, and encouraged his ckil-
dren and grand children to bet heavily.
Gaming tables were kept ready in
the palace, and the King loved to pass
among che high-born lords and ladies
who were gambling, and exchange
courteous nothings with them while
the games were going on. Several
times he appropriated huge sums OF
public money to defray the gambling
debts of his family and his favorites.
The same fashion of universal gaming
continued under the Regency of Or
leans, and continued during the long
reign of Louis XIV.
When John Law was in London.
Charles II, and all the Court, and all
the fashionable world, gambled. When
he went to Europe he found the same
fever raging there, Being high flyer
himself, John Law followed the fash
ion. In Rome he did as the Romans
did. Associating with kings, queens,
princes, dukes and other sad trash of
similar sort, he lost the simple ways OF
his Scotch ancestors, and became "a
man of the world" He could not hope
to surpass the immoralities of the
French Court, but he kept in sight.
Good manners required it. He could
not bet as heavily as King Louis, or
the prince of the Blood, because he had
no tax-money of the people out OF
which to recoup his losses. He could
not drink as much and be drunk as
often as the Duke of Orleans, because
he was foreigner and had a charac-
ter to sustain. He could not keep as
many fine horses as the Duke of Bour'
bon, because he was not the heir of
family which had been looting the
national treasury of France for two
hundred years. He could not afford q
seraglio of as many fine women, as the
Duke of Richelieu, because he had to
pass at least part of the day in attend
ing to business.
But while Law was not so bad as any
of these highborn rascals, we admit
that he followed, humbly, at distance,
and became as loose in his morals as
royal etiquette demanded.
If governmental theories are to be
upset because their authors were sinful
men, we shall find it difficult to defend
ANY system. Thomas Jefferson was nc
saint, nor was Alexander Hamilton,
nor was George Washington. The
Father of his Country loved quiet
game of cards, enjoyed the excitement
of moderate bets and kept a faithful
record of his winnings and his losses.
The Telegraph should reconsider.
To assail fiat money because John Law
bet on cards, or at the Faro table, is
not good logic.
Gold standard editors should remem-
Der that their own leaders may be hui
man and frail; and before worship.
per at the shrine of Grover Cleveland's
theory of finance ventures to assail the
private morals of John Law, he should
remember that Grover Clevelands pri-
vate character cannot be called i'm
maculate.
T. E. w.