The Savannah morning news., 1903-06-07
WHERE SHOULD THE LINE BE
DRAWN.

OF his paper Mr.. Bryan says there
seems to be a wide difference of opin-
| ion as to the propriety of accepting
gifts from men like Rockefeller He
then proceeds to give his reasons why
! gifts from such men ought not TO be
| accepted by educa tional institutions.
churches and other benevolent enter
prises.
Mr.. Bryan asks If any Christian col
lege or any other worthy institution
would accept a gift from a group OF
highwaymen who had succeeded in ac-
cumulating a large sum by robbery.
and had escaped punishment by terri
flying the authorities. The inference is
OF course, that those who accumulate
their wealth by means of a private
monopoly are no better than highway
'@men. In fact. he says that a private
monopoly is an outlaw" He points out
that Mr.. Rockefeller's wealth is based
upon the Standard Oil Company, and
that that company exercises an abso-
lutte control over the price of oil. This.
he says, is an immoral and an illegal
use of the taxing power. but that, so
far, the Standard Oil Company has
had influence enough to prevent the
enforcement of the law against it.
II is admitted that the Standard Oil
Company is a monopoly, and it has
been charged and is widely believed
that it secured its monopoly by meth
DDS that right thinking people cannot
approve, but is Mr.. Rockefeller, who
is understood to be the brains and
chief stockholder Of the company to
be condemned unheard? By that we
mean are his gifts to be rejected be-
cause it is alleged that his money was
accumulated by Illegal and immoral
means? If he is all that Mr. Bryan
to destroy his monopoly and to punish
him for wrong-doing?
The fact must not be overlooked that
Mr.. Rockefeller is a church member
in good standing and that he is highly
esteemed not only by the minister of
his church and it's congregation. but
also by business men generally in the
city in which he lives. Not long ago
in this city, an eminent minister from
the lecture platform declared that Mr..
Rockefeller was a much abused man
that, in fact, he was a most excellent
man from any point of view.
We mention the esteem in which he
is held by those who are associated
with him ", rbrrch O ffaire Qua l1,,si
ness enterprises not as defense of
him, but TO show that there are two
views of the mantle one held by Mr..
Bryan and those who agree with him,
and the other by ministers, educators
and business men who come in contact
with him. The view held by Mr.. Bryan
4 may be the right one, but, until it is
| settled that it is, are Christian col
leges and other benevolent institutions
to be debarred from accepting gifts
| from him?
II it should be settled that his wealth
was not acquired in accordance with
the highest standards, then the ques-
ton would arise as to whether or not
| his gifts should be accepted. OF this
| question there has been a great deal
of discussion within the last few
months. The weight of opinion, how
ever, seems to be that they should be
accepted where there are no condi-
tons which would have a silencing in
| luence upon the institutions accepting
them-where college presidents and
tarnfagGnrc he to ~
silent in regard to trusts and the de-
morahzing influences of great for
tunes.
If universities. hospitals and benevo-
lent institutions generally were to in
quire, in each instance, as to the means
by which the wealth offered them was
accumulated, it is probable that the
gifts would be much fewer than they
are. Fortunes based upon monopolies
are not the only ones that are tainted
with wrong doing. If gifts should be
| rejected because they were from faint
ed sources then there ought to be an
investigation as to all gifts, even
though 1t is not alleged that they are
tainted with wrong doing.
1t is doubtful if men who have a
genius for accommodating money would
be better If it were understood that
only honestly acquired money would be
accepted by benevolent institutions.
and it is question If such institu-
lions would be more prosperous if they
were to be more particular than they
are as to whether the money donated
to them was acquired without the in
fringement of any legal or moral law.